Ethical Issue Matrix

Ethical issue: Illegal reproduction and distribution of software and applications
Stakeholders	Autonomy	Nonmaleficence	Justice
1. Myself	The principle of autonomy posits that we have an obligation to decisions others make regarding our lives. As a principle of human dignity as referred to in ethics, everyone should respect my decision concerning whether or not to copy and distribute software illegally. Such a decision is arrived at by my authentic values, reasons, and desires and thus must be respected.	The principle of nonmaleficence in ethics prohibits any form of harm in performing a beneficial act. In this case, deciding whether to reproduce and distribute software applications should not inflict harm on any person. Therefore, as Al-Bar and Chamsi-Pasha (2015) suggest, the consideration of harm and its effects should serve as a major foundation for my decision-making process. For instance, by pirating, I would be harming developers, legal distributors, and the organization.	The principle of justice demands that one demonstrates fairness, equality, and access in their decisions. According to Schröder-Bäck et al. (2014), we all have equal moral worth. Hence, we have a responsibility to treat every person fairly, appropriately, and equitably. That said, my decision to reproduce or distribute software applications would be unethical since I would be unfair to the developers and vendors of these software applications.
2. Users	Saunders (2011) subdivides the principle of autonomy into three—the autonomy of thought, will, and action. According to the author, autonomy forms the basis for consent and thus a dominant principle in decision-making. In this sense, users must respect the decisions of the developers of the software tools. Pirating software against the will of the developers is a demonstration of selfish indifference.	The principle of primum non-nocere translating to “first of all, do no harm” is a moral foundation for ethical decision-making (Chamsi-Pasha, 2015). According to the principle, the actions of users of software applications are ethical as long as they do not cause negative consequences. Pirated software is not in the best interest of concerned parties such as developers and owners. Therefore, under the fundamental theory of nonmaleficence, users do not have a right to procure and use pirated software tools.	The principle of justice speaks to fairness and equity in treating others. In this sense, users have a moral duty to demonstrate fairness and equity in their acts and decisions. That being the case, reproducing, distributing, or using pirated software tools would an act of injustice to various parties, including the owners, operators, developers, and licensed distributors of these applications.
3. Developers and distributors	Owners and developers of software and computer applications have a moral authority to make independent decisions that everyone must respect, including those who use their products. The decision to price their products or restrict their usage is arrived at by their authentic values, reasons, and desires and thus must be respected. Nonetheless, they should also not pirate other developers’ software.	Owners or developers have a responsibility to avoid causing harm in their decisions. In as much as reproducing and distributing their software without their consent is unethical, there are instances where limiting the access and use of their products can cause harm to others. A classic example is regional restrictions. Their decisions must be in the best interests of everyone involved, including all types of users.	The principle of justice is mostly relevant to this group of stakeholders as far as the illegal use, copying, and distribution of software are concerned. This is because the primary reason for the unethical behavior is the lack of equity and fairness in accessing such tools. The pricing of the software should take into account the socioeconomic status of every type of buyer to ensure equitable access. In other words, to avoid software piracy, developers should be fair in their pricing and restrictions.
4. Regulators	Regulators are stakeholders who control the production and distribution of software. They essentially prohibit copying, reproducing, or distributing software applications with the consent of developers and distributors. Therefore, they must demonstrate ethics in their decision-making. Regulators have a moral authority of self-rule. The principle of autonomy gives them the power to make independent decisions on software piracy .	The theory of nonmaleficence prevents regulators from causing any form of harm in their decisions. The possibility of causing harm while regulating software production and distribution is high. For example, wrongfully apprehending a person. As such, regulators have a moral obligation to be careful to prevent harm. In this case, according to t he Ethics of International Engagement & Service Learning (2021), regulators must show the intention to avoid potential harm that can arise from omission or commission.	In the ethics of copyright, regulators have the biggest role to play in terms of ensuring justice. They accomplish justice in copyright through policies and laws. The following must be elements of the laws to ensure justice. First, the software protected must be the work of developers, and secondly, it must be original. In doing so, they exercise justice, fairness, and equitability in the use and distribution of software.  Justice also involves equitable pricing and access to such software applications. Some members of society should not be prevented from using the applications due to unfair business practices.

I chose to address the illegal reproduction and distribution of software applications because as an ethical issue because software piracy is a major problem in society today. According to the latest report published by Liao et al. (2020), the implications of piracy are concerning. For instance, 67.3 percent of people worldwide use pirated software, causing billions of losses for developers and distributors. Another reason I chose to address the issue is because of the limitations of the current legal system in addressing the problem. There is an increasing need for a comprehensive ethical policy to fill the gap left by the weak legal system.

The three ethical principles are important for various reasons. For instance, the principle of autonomy ensures everyone is actively involved in using and distributing software applications. In doing so, they are also held accountable for their decisions. The principle of maleficence serves the role of preventing stakeholders from procuring a greater benefit at the expense of harming others. It ensures everyone makes decisions by accepting the lesser or no harm. Justice is particularly important in the spheres of ethics and politics. It is impossible to maintain law and order unless they achieve justice. The actions included in the matrix are a product of extensive research from peer-reviewed materials on the ethical issue and the outlined principles.

Reproduction And Distribution of Software Policy 

1. Overview 

In terms of illegal reproduction and distribution of software tools and applications, software piracy accounts for a significant portion of piracy practices in the modern digital era. As Liao et al. (2020) put it, more than 67.3 percent of people use pirated software. The report further suggests that 81.8 percent of people do not have to buy or pay for software online; the major forms of piracy include activation by cracking (54.5 percent) and CD/DVD (38.2 percent). Given the level of software piracy, the use and distribution of software must be conducted along ethical standards.

2. Purpose 

The principal role of the policy is to define the use, reproduction, and distribution of software within the company. Generally, according to Siponen et al. (2010), policies serve as guidance towards achieving objectives and establishing procedures for organizational compliance. In this case, the effective implementation of this particular policy will eliminate unauthorized access, use, reproduction, and distribution of computer software applications by organization members.

2.1 Roles and Responsibilities 

Chief IT Officer: responsible for software management, piracy policy, and guidance on the compliance of the policy's requirements.

Information Security Officers (ISO): responsible for ensuring members of the organization are knowledgeable of security requirements and standards of the policy.

Managers: Responsible for addressing incidences of noncompliance.

Employees, contractors, and other users: shall ensure the proper acquisition and use of appropriately approved software.

3. Scope 

All persons directly and indirectly associated with the organization must adhere to the provisions of the policy. The policy applies to employees, consultants, contracted professionals, and workers temporarily hired by the organization. The document details specific requirements for using, producing, and distributing computer software in the organization. In other words, the policy ensures employees and affiliated members of the organization use appropriately licensed and approved software and not pirated.

4. Policy 

Only appropriately licensed and approved software and computer applications for use shall be installed in the organization's computer systems, personal computers and serves within the company. This standard applies to all ranges of software tools, including shareware, software for demonstration, and freeware. Software installed on individually owned computer systems and used for organizational purposes must be accompanied by an appropriate license approved by the software developer.

As an organization that adheres to the ethical standards of software use and distribution, software tools and systems the organization procure must be subject to the publishers' license agreement requirements. The purpose of this is to limit the distribution of the software in terms of whom and how. In that regard, the information technology (IT) department, IT experts, and users with the power to approve the software installation must do so with the knowledge of the license requirements. This requirement also ensures that the use of such software within the company does not violate the agreement of the software publisher.

Employees and affiliate members of the organization who purchase and run any form of the software shall do so according to the standards established by the copyright infringement laws. The software download, installation, and distribution practices within the organization must be defined by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs). That is, the software bought and installed shall:

Be original and have appropriate licenses from the publishers of the software applications.

Used according to the principles defined by the license

Accompanied by appropriate documents and records of the license

Only software approved by the organization’s Chief IT Officer and appropriately acquired according to copyright infringement laws shall be installed and used in the computer systems and servers of the company. Any department or individual seeking to acquire and install a new software application must do so with the approval of the Chief IT Officer.

The IT Department headed by the Chief IT Officer shall periodically scan organizational and work-related personal computer resources and servers to detect software piracy. The procedure shall be taken as part of the effort to ensure the possession and use of computer software is consistent with the terms of the organization's software license.

Every branch or organizational unit of the company shall establish procedures for conducting auditing of acquired and installed software on the company’s computer system.

The standards of the policy apply to current, future, and modified software tools and applications, and computer systems.

5. Policy Compliance 

In conjunction with the Human Resource (HR) team, the IT department shall be responsible for the compliance of the policy in a variety of ways, including, but not restricted to, constant monitoring, business reports, periodic audits, walk-thru, and feedbacks.

An employee or affiliate person of the organization found guilty of violating the principles of the policy shall be subjected to the disciplinary committee. The organization reserves the right to protect electronic resources from an immediate threat. Therefore, disciplinary action may include and is not limited to disconnecting a computer system, suspension, and termination of an employment contract.

Any exceptions to the policy shall be approved by the team in advance.

References 

Al-Bar, M. A., & Chamsi-Pasha, H. (2015). Nonmaleficence. In Contemporary Bioethics (pp. 119-128). Springer, Cham. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18428-9_7 

Liao, Z., Nazir, S., Hussain, A., Khan, H. U., & Shafiq, M. (2020). Software Piracy Awareness, Policy, and User Perspective in Educational Institutions. Scientific Programming , 2020 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6647819 

Saunders, J. (2011). Autonomy, Consent, and the law. Clinical Medicine , 11 (1), 94-95. DOI: 10.7861/clinmedicine.11-1-94 

Schröder-Bäck, P., Duncan, P., Sherlaw, W., Brall, C., & Czabanowska, K. (2014). Teaching seven principles for public health ethics: towards a curriculum for a short course on ethics in public health programs. BMC Medical Ethics , 15 (1), 1-10. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6939-15-73 

Siponen, M., Pahnila, S., & Mahmood, M. A. (2010). Compliance with information security policies: An empirical investigation. Computer , 43 (2), 64-71. DOI: 10.1109/MC.2010.35 

The Ethics of International Engagement & Service Learning. (2021). Non-Maleficence and Beneficence . IESL. Retrieved from http://ethicsofisl.ubc.ca/?page_id=172