- Flappy Bird Taken Down
- Is downloading really stealing? The ethics of digital piracy
- Mylan's EpiPen Pricing Crossed Ethical Boundaries
- Opinion | It's Your iPhone. Why Can't You Fix It Yourself? (Published 2019)
Was Flappy Bird a breach of copyright? Was their game too similar and where do you draw the line?
- Gameplay very different to nintendo mario brothers.
- Hard to draw a line on what is considered okay
- Closer to the helicopter game reskinned.
- Moral blindness (not aware that it could be an issue.)
King has trademarked 'candy' and 'saga' for mobile games. They recently retracted 'candy' in the US but still has the "Candy" trademark in the European Union, and it does not plan to abandon that. Are these words too restrictive? Is it ethical to limit others' use of words just because you used it first.
- Same gamestyle would make sense that you cannot use these words in the title.
- Ethically no words should be limited.
- Reputational cost.
- Moral blindness huge issue determining whether its okay to use words in your title. Tied to popularity if you should be allowed.
Is piracy ethical?
- Generally no.
- VPNs are a similar case
- Sampling is a poor excuse
- Duplicating (ok from a consequential pov)
- Pirating free content would be ethical (but possibly not pirating at that point)
- Should you have access to it for free? (Consequential)
Is Bittorrent themselves responsible for the piracy conducted using their software?
No because there is little they could do to stop it.
Are video game emulators illegal?
Are the roms used with video game emulators illegal (even if you purchased the game?)?
Yes. You've paid to play it on that medium
Should video game emulators exist?
The only legal use would be for developing video games
Do you think emulators are unethical? Kant/Mills?
Speed-running and Older consoles would be ethical uses of them from a consequential POV
- Having bought the game and the console previously
- Provided there is no official emulator for it
Is it ethical to have IP over life saving products such as medicines?
The price of the EpiPen, a life-saving product has increased over 500%. They have patent protection that lasts through until 2025.
- Overall, it is ok, but the problem lies in the ethical use of the patent
- It can take up to 10 years to get something to market, and patents only last for around 25-30 years so you only really get around 20 years in market.
- It is a private industry so we need to foster research and new developments, patents help with this as it provides an incentive.
- Patents can inhibit research into future technologies as other researchers are limited in what they can do. E.g auto-0injector tech can be spread to other medicines.
Do you think this is a convenient excuse to allow for price hiking or is it a decision made from ethical decision making?
Producers of medical equipment such as ventilators often try to prevent the public sharing of manuals to discourage self-repairs under the explanation that they can cause the machine to operate in ways not intended and can cause harm to users.
- Pretty clear that they are doing it so that instead of consumers spending $100 on someone else rather than buying a fresh one for a few thousand.
- Why not have an authorised repairman.
- If someone was to fix it themselves and it goes wrong, it is not technically the manufacturers fault, but it would be bad publicity anyway.
What are some arguments for/against the "Right to repair"?
Right to repair: If you bought something, you should be able to give it to a third party to fix it instead of just the company
- If you bought something, you own and you should be able to do what you want with it
- Its cheaper the consumer to repair than to replace
- Knowing how devices work internally helps to mod
- Not creating electronic waste
- Potential to destroy the device which could harm the company reputation
- Potential safety hazards if end users try to modify devices
- Protect trade secrets to avoid copy cats
- Make more money with proprietary repair and selling warranty
- Modern devices provide more energy efficient solutions than previous so makes it more cost effective than repairing old ones
How does "Right to repair" relate to "Planned obsolescence"?
- Creating a product to fail after a certain amount of time
- Example: Apple software updates drain older batteries faster and slow the phone down
- Right to repair can circumvent planned obsolescence
What are the ethical implications of planned obsolescence? Does it affect more than just the end user?
- Not making the best product you can, designing it to fail or require repairs
- Breaching the trust of consumers. Informed consent. User is not privy to the fact that the device is going to break in a set amount of time.
- Kantian ethics -> duty to provide a good product that you know will work. Treat humanity as an end not a mean.
- Also affects environment and general public by electronic waste