Ethical Reflections on Internet Piracy

Jessica Malm Master Year Student

Mälardalens University Department of Computer science

jmm00002@student.mdh.se

Abstract Piracy, unauthorized copying, is today a highly

widespread phenomenon, which causes a lot of worries and disputes in the media industry. Many of us download software programs from the Internet without fee and without considering the consequences. We could end up with less well produced products and the overall economic of the society could be negatively affected. Is there any situation or reason when it is ethically acceptable to download and use other people’s work without permission and without paying for it? Are excuses like to high prices on the products, downloading just to test a program before buying it, social interaction through sharing software etc. liable excuses to make piracy ethically acceptable? In this paper we try to explore the reasons and integrate them in a case study. The cases are analyzed by using different ethical theories, through which the conclusion was reached that there are some exceptions where piracy could be considered not unethical.

1 Introduction / Background Software piracy is defined as the unauthorized copying of an organization’s internally developed software or the illegal duplication of commercially available software in order to avoid fees [1]. Today, piracy is very widespread. There are many ways to download or get information on where to find pirated copies of or through the Internet. You can do this for example through e-mail, news groups, the real-time chat system Internet Relay Chat (IRC), Auctions sites, File Transfer Protocol (FTP), peer-to-peer (P2P) system and so forth. One of the most popular nowadays is P2P systems. P2P systems allow users to search, download and share files without connecting to a server, instead it is the users’ computers who serve as both server and user. As P2P programs do not have severs, there is no central point at witch the system can be shut down. Napster for example is discussed to be a P2P system [2], however they used a server to store an index of songs, and this made it possible to shut down.

Napster’s owners and operators were sued by the Recording Industry Association for illegally distributing copyrighted music on the Internet and Napster lost and was eventually shut down. Now there a number of different pure (does not have a server) P2P systems, for example KaZaa, Gnutella, Bearshare, Morpheus and Direct Connect. The founders for those programs clear themselves of suspicion by claiming that they only provide the means to download and that they have little or none control of the users activities [3]. In a law suit against Morpheus P2P software in 2003, a federal judge ruled that companies providing P2P software cannot be liable for the copyright infringement done by the users of that system [4].

The Software Publishers Association (SPA) [3] calculated that the software industry has an annual loss of as much as 16 billion dollars because of software piracy [5]. Globally, four out of ten copies of software is suspected to be pirated copies [6]. The difference from country to country is however huge, it is ranging from 26% to 95%. Vietnam is the country that has with 95% the highest pirate rating. The region of the world that has the highest pirate rate is Eastern Europe with 71% [7]. The pirating rate is probably highly depending on the differences in legal systems and moral beliefs that different countries have.

The copyright law states that the copyright holder is given certain exclusive rights, including the right to make and distribute copies. It is illegal to make or distribute copies of copyrighted material without authorization. The only exception is the user’s right to make a backup copy for archival purposes. The law guaranties the copyright owner, the author in most cases, the exclusive rights to the reproduction and distribution of his intellectual property. Thus, copyright law guaranties the owner of the intellectual property the same types of rights that patent law guaranties the owner of an invention or other piece of seemingly more tangible physical property. (A complete version of the US copyright law can be found at [8])

This means that it is not allowed to copy a software program, not even for private use. You cannot download a program from a webpage without permission from those of which the license of the program belongs to. The copyright law gives all copyright holders the same protection. People who create a piece of work ought to be entitled to decide how it should be used. The penalties for pirating can be paying damages or even get jail sentences.

Copyright laws are often national, which means they only apply in one specific country. This often makes the Internet a very hard and complex global medium to control. Do your country’s copyright laws apply if you, for example are downloading unauthorized software from a site that has its origin in another country? Or do that county’s laws hold? There are some countries that do not have any laws against software copying.

It can be hard to determine if the copyright law has been violated or not, as it is hard to interpret how the copyright laws are to be applied to the Internet piracy. Because of this, many pirates has found loopholes in order to get away with their piracy. The copyright law makes a difference between ideas and expression. An idea cannot be copyrighted, but the expression of that idea can be. An author cannot own the ideas in his or her writing but can copyright the writing as a unique expression of these ideas [9]. Therefore they have, due to the copyright law, a sort of protection; others are not allowed to copy their work without permission. This also enables the author for himself / herself to decide how to distribute the work; it also allows him/her to make money on his/her work.

This paper is to explore if there are any reason or excuses that can make piracy a moral defendable act. The second chapter discuss some of the reasons and excuses used by the pirates in order to defend their pirating behaviour. After that, in the third chapter, the consequences piracy has are explored. The information and facts we have concluded in the second and the third chapter is then implemented in a case study. Three cases are created to target the different aspects of piracy discussed. They are analyzed by using different ethical theories, to view the cases in different perspectives in order to try to determine if they are unethical or not. The paper is centralized on software piracy.

2 Discussion on why people pirate There are a lot of reasons that can make people turn to piracy on the Internet instead of purchasing the item they want legally. There are also a lot of excuses, in

order to justify it. In this chapter these things are explored. 2.1 Economic Many people justify their downloading and copying of software, music, movies, games etc. by blaming it on the high prices those products have [10] [11]. They are neither willing or cannot pay what it would cost to purchase the goods the legal way. They do not see anything wrong with downloading the product for free from the Internet, at least not until the prices is reduced. The public’s sympathy for the major companies like for example Microsoft is likely to be negligible, some might even justify themselves morally, saying that it only effects those big companies whose only wish is to make more money anyway and would not suffer if some people downloaded their products for free.

The pirates say that if they had not downloaded the products from the Internet, they would not have bought the goods anyway. If you would not have purchased the pirated product anyway, you do not hurt anyone, right? But even if you would not have bought it you are using a product that has been spent money and time on and should therefore pay for it. After all, to steal an object, for example a book, with the excuse that you would not have spent any money on it the regular way, is not accepted by society.

Some pirates say that it depends on what we are talking about. Is it a professional program that costs thousands of crowns if it would be bought legally? You could argue that you are not likely to use all the programs features, and would have considered another cheaper alternative if you had found any that provided the services you wanted. You could also say that you wanted to test and see if the program fulfilled your wishes before you go and spend a lot of money on it. Another opinion is that it depends on whether it is a private person that wants the program for hobby-activity, or if it is a company that downloads a program to use in their business activities, or purchase one license for a program and than use it on several computers in the company. Some mean that if one person uses the program without making a profit out of it, it is less harmful, than if a company uses pirated copies in the money-making process.

Should information be available to everyone, free of charge? “Information wants to be free” is a phrase often used when talking about piracy, in other words it says that everyone, independent of economic situation, should have the same right to information. Can we argue that every person has the same right to see, hear and experience the same things as everyone else? It

would of cause be ultimate if everyone has the same access and right to the same things independently on if you are able to buy it or not. However, should everything be made available to everyone? Would that not diminish people’s strife to improve their lives by contributing to society?

Moores suggests in his paper [12] that increased personal wealth results in a natural decline in software piracy and a tendency to buy legal software, but it is quite obvious that even if people could afford to buy the products legally, the temptation to acquire something for free is hard to resist. The small chance of detection might also inspire a person’s thoughts about saving the money to buy something that is not so easy to overcome for free instead.

2.2 Exposure Some defenders of piracy might say that piracy in a way is good for software companies, musicians etc. because it gives them extra publicity. They say that without piracy, the different programs would never be so spread around the world as they are now. A person can download the product and inform his friends about this product and then, if they want to, they can go and buy it. The general thought of this might be good, but it is not reasonable to think that those people would buy the product instead of downloading it for free. Of course some people may find out about a program they would have use of only due to the fact that someone has downloaded it and they might even buy it. However, the most logical thing to conclude is that, the majority of these people, would not go and buy it, they would just download it. This contradicts with the fact that this “advertisement” should benefit the copyright holder, which it actually does not do, at least not significantly. The product may be well known but that does not mean that they will sell more legal copies.

There could also be a lot of negative exposure; what if the downloaded copies have been tampered with or become reviewed as bad only due to a bad copy?[10] The product could then receive an undeserved bad reputation.

There are also those who make a profit out of selling pirated copies, which is often despised by nonprofit-making pirates. The basic idea with piracy is to share information and knowledge and allows those who cannot afford it a chance to have the latest and most advanced software. Those that sell pirated software can do it with the buyers’ knowledge that it is an illegal copy, but some also sell copies to persons that buy the goods in good faith. They believe that they are buying a legal copy. This can also create a less favorable

attitude towards the company that produces the product. Even if it was not their fault, the persons that did buy a pirated copy are likely to associate that products producer with their bad experience.

2.3 Easy Access One thing that makes piracy so appealing, besides that it is free, is the endless amount of files to be downloaded from the Internet. You can find almost anything you want, everything from songs, old or new, and videos to new advanced software. You do not have to be an expert on computers to start downloading and if there is some skill that is necessary, other pirates are often more than willing to help out. Some who favors piracy means that a pirate wants to share information, to learn and to have fun.

An argument against piracy is that many of the pirated files on the Internet contain viruses and other harmful defects that may be troublesome or offensive to a non-suspecting downloader. Many files are also incomplete, for example only contains half a movie or not the complete song; many files are also not functional [7]. All of this can cause the user to get very unsatisfied and irritated.

By purchasing a legal copy you will get a functional product, containing all the parts and which does not contain viruses. You will also get documentation about how to use the product and you also often get some sort of support system. This will not be available if you get a pirated copy. But on the other hand you will have to actually buy the product. To buy a product can be difficult even if you actually can afford it, depending on the access of that particular item. Maybe you want an old album or a software program that they do not sell in your country, maybe you have to order it and wait for weeks before you have the product in your hands. In those cases the easy accessible pirated copies on the Internet seems very tempting.

2.4 Other reasons There are other reasons maybe less obvious to why people illegally download software, music etc. other than those already discussed. One of the largest groups of pirates is probably teenage-boys. A whole new social culture has seen the sun as a consequence of the extensive growth of the Internet. The teenagers’ wants to be a part of this community, and as in an ordinary group the issue of feeling important, getting respect and being popular is substantial. You could gain these feelings and attitudes by for example offering or having a pirated copy of a not even released software program. Or maybe you have the skill to crack a code to a new computer program and share this with your

friends on the Internet and by doing this, gain recognition and power. It is perhaps a human need to be a part of something greater; to be a part of a group and some people would do anything to be a part of that, even if it means breaking the law.

Another important issue is the “I want” – attitude. You might have downloaded a copy of some software that you do not really need, just because you could. This could boost your confidence and make you feel good about yourself. There can also be the thrill of knowing that you are doing something that is illegal that draws some people to piracy. Some might think it is exciting to see how far they can go without being caught, to challenge the system so to speak. Someone, that might be lacking adventure and excitement in real life or maybe does not have the courage, might seek the somewhat anonymous way to try to express or experience those things through Internet and piracy. It can perhaps be a way to forget about the real life, a life that does not fulfill the person’s wishes.

There can also be the issue of group pressure. Everyone you know does it and they press you to do it or maybe even harass you if you do not do the same. Maybe everyone else has a copy of the latest game, illegally or not, and you feel left out if you do not have the same. Then, piracy can perhaps be seen as a means to, in some way, prevent envy and alienation.

The spirit of sharing is also something that pirates hold high when they are defending their actions. You are taught as a child that sharing is good, so way is it not acceptable now?

All of those things are based on the feeling of being someone and to have a meaning. For many people, this can be a hard thing to acquire in today’s somewhat superficial society. With the Internet, a person can be what he wants to be, he can be an important and popular person even if he does not have for example the looks or the social skills required to be popular or important in the “real world”. He may not have a social life or even friends in the “real world” but through the Internet he can get that and maybe he can pretend to be someone he is not or he could get the courage to show who he really is.

3 Consequences The industry defends their high prices by saying that they are forced to keep the high prices or even increase the price in order to compensate for loses of income due to piracy [10]. As said in the introduction the Software Publishers Association (SPA) [3] believe that the software industry is losing 16 billion a year to piracy. But as it is not very likely that every

downloaded copy would have been purchased legally, if it could not be downloaded, that figure is likely to be lower.

The companies also uphold that they, due to piracy, have less money to spend on development and maintenance (updates and services) of the products and that that would in the end affect the user. An interpretation of the industries view is that if everyone stops with piracy, the prices would go down and the products would become better. However, you can conclude that private persons and the industry have became stuck in a vicious circle, that tends to go for higher prices and more piracy instead of lower prices and less piracy.

If the companies lose a lot of money because of piracy it could mean that they have to dismiss people and reduce wages [3]. This would also affect the public negatively. The IT sector now employs more than nine million people, raises more than 700 billion dollar in taxes a year and contributes nearly a trillion dollars a year to global economy [7]. Stagnation in the IT business would certainly affect a lot of people and make a significant impact on the overall economy.

Another considerable problem that can be caused by piracy is the fact that new smaller software companies would have no chance to introduce themselves or survive for very long in the business. They do not have the financial funds that the larger companies have and therefore cannot withstand the effect piracy would have on them. Also, a potential idea could be lost due to the fact that the inventor does not see a promising future in this business, mostly because the idea could be stolen right away by pirates, hungry for new information. This means that the public would lose potential information and products that they could be in need of or perhaps would help them improve their lives

4 Case Study The following three fictional cases are created to illustrate the reasons discussed in chapter 2. It should be said that all three cases are a bit exaggerated in order to create a greater difference between them. The cases are to be discussed by using different ethical theories in order to try to establish if piracy, indifferent to the reason, is unethical and morally wrong, or if there exists situations where piracy can be seen as an accepted act. The theories that are used are utilitarianism, deontology, ethical egoism and virtue ethics [13].

4.1 Cases 4.1.1 Case 1: Kalle Kalle, a 15-year-old, is downloading all the latest versions of games and software from the Internet by using the P2P program Direct Connect. Through the web he has created a wide circle of friends from all over the world. They trade information about new software, new ways to download, they socialize etc. Kalle spend almost all of his free time by the computer, as he does not have any other friends. Kalle says that by sharing information and taking part of other people’s information he has become part of a group, something that he is lacking in “real” life. Since he started with piracy and other activates on the net, he has become more self-confident and happier. His parents know that it is illegal to download pirated software, but they let him, because they are happy he has finally found something that he enjoys and is good at.

4.1.2 Case 2: Jörgen Jörgen is an employee at a big company with a good salary. Even if he can afford the software, he is downloading it from the Internet without fee. He is downloading because he can easily and quickly find the things he wants. Another reason why he downloads is that he does not want to wait until the latest software is released in his country, when he can get it of the Internet earlier. He has a fast connection, which means that he often has high downloading speeds, so he does not have the problem with endless downloading hours. He also feels quite proud of himself when he succeeds in finding and downloading a specially rare and new item and even more if he gets that product to work properly. He is aware that piracy is illegal, but feels secure that he won’t get caught.

4.1.3 Case 3: Sofia Sofia is a single mother of two and she has a pressed budget. She is interested in computers and wants to learn more. To achieve this she has to have some new programs. Sofia also feels that she wants her children to have some programs and games just like many other children have. She cannot afford to buy the programs, so the only way is to download them or receive a copy from a friend. She does not feel very guilty because, face it, she could never buy the programs the legal way anyway, and therefore she believes she has caused no harm to the copyright holders. She would however, rather buy the programs legally if she could afford it.

4.2 Ethical Analysis: Utilitarianism Applied Utilitarianism holds that an action is good if it serve to maximize human well-being. Utilitarianism focuses on the happiness and content of the whole society and not

on the well-being of an individual. Utilitarianism convicts an action by its consequences or by the amount of good that comes from it. In utilitarianism it is the consequences that matter not the intentions. An objection to utilitarianism could be that it is very hard to know what will lead to the greatest good for everybody. This because it is impossible to know all the consequences an action could have. So to maximize the amount of good to the society is somewhat of guesswork and it is an existing danger that this guess might be wrong.

4.2.1 Applied to case 1: Kalle Kalle’s action is making both him and his parents happy. Kalle feels happy because piracy makes him an important and valuable person in a group. By making himself a happier person he also makes his surrounding (parents and presumably other related) happier. Also the fact that he can provide his friends with information and software can make the friends happier. Kalle’s action would however not make the copyright holder significantly happier. Kalle’s action may not have any effect on the copyright owner by himself, but there are many like Kalle. Together they will have a noticeable affect. Kalle, his friends and the society could also suffer, as a consequence of piracy and reduced income to the companies, from software that has bad quality. Kalle’s and his parents’ actions does not quite seem ethical by the utilitarianism’s definition.

4.2.2 Applied to case 2: Jörgen Jörgen’s action will only make him happier, no one but himself benefits if he downloads without paying for it. He is in no way depending on piracy in order to secure his happiness. After all, he could buy the products legally. He is just too lazy and to impatient to do it and these are no favorable virtues. It is reasonable to think that he, depending on his economic situation, would buy the product the legal way if piracy did not exist. This means that his actions would affect the copyright holders negatively and by that create unhappiness and diminish the overall well-being of the society. The copyright holder would suffer from an economic loss due to his actions and would therefore have less money to spend on developing new products. People could get unemployed or have reduced wages etc. This would affect both himself and the society negatively. This must be considered, even in utilitarianisms eyes, to be an unethical act and morally inexcusable reasons to pirate.

4.2.3 Applied to case 3: Sofia The consequences of Sofia’s action will make both her and her children happy. Sofia is depending on piracy

or getting pirated copies to satisfy her need for more and deepened computer knowledge. She also wants her children to have programs and games to prevent them from becoming jealous and maybe alienated from the other children. As buying the programs the legal way is not a doable option for Sofia, the copyright holders are not likely to loose any significant income and happiness because of her. By the definition of utilitarianism she is not doing anything that can be considered ethically wrong. Her action creates more happiness and satisfaction than the opposite.

4.3 Ethical Analysis: Deontology Applied Deontology is the theory of our duties. It states that we have duties and responsibilities to laws; both laws that are federal and the laws that are universal, as they apply to everyone, indifferent to where in the world you are or which time you are living in. It also tells us to do what is morally right despite the consequences that result from that action. Deontology says that we should take a look historically and follow others examples. If there are no rules to follow for a particular action, you can create a law yourself, but it has to be a universal law. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) held that our moral duties are fundamental. He was the founder of the categorical imperatives, which says that you should act so that the maxim (a general truth or a rule of conduct expressed in short form) may be capable of becoming a universal law for everyone.

4.3.1 Applied to case 1: Kalle Kalle’s parents think they act according to their duties as parents. They want their child to feel good and to be happy. Their maxim can be like this; “if the only thing that can make my child happy is to pirate software, than he should be allowed to do it (even if it means breaking the law)”. Well, first you can ask yourself; is it really good parentage to allow your child to break the law? What if he gets caught? But as most of us understand the urge to make your child feel good and happy, we can agree that if piracy is really the only thing, all other alternatives explored and excluded, that can make the child happy and content then it is a justified action and as a consequence of this the maxim could than be considered as universal.

4.3.2 Applied to case 2: Jörgen Jörgen’s main reason for piracy is the easy and fast access to endless amount of files, both released and non-released, that exists on the Internet. His maxim can be as follows; “I download pirated products because it is easier and faster than to buy them the legally way”. Do we really want this to be a universally practiced law? If the law would be practiced, people like Jörgen and all other for the

matter who do not pirate, would suffer from less software and poorer quality. Jörgen’s has no reason that is enough to defend him when breaking the copyright law. Therefore, Jörgen is committing an unethical and immoral act. The maxim should not be made universal.

4.3.3 Applied to case 3: Sofia Sofia’s problem is that she cannot afford to buy the programs she wants, both for her and her children. Her maxim can be formulated like this; “If I cannot afford the software I need, I pirate it, even if it is illegal”. Can this be seen as an acceptable law? Hypothetical if only those who could not actually afford to buy the software pirated, there is really nothing that says that it is the wrong thing to do. No one would be significantly hurt by Sofia’s action. Sofia action can be seen as acceptable and right.

4.4 Ethical Analysis: Ethical Egoism Applied Ethical egoism says that every person should just look out for himself/herself. An action is right and good if it satisfies his/hers own feeling, happiness and interest. Psychological egoism says that we always do act selfishly. It says that we always act selfishly even if we might not be aware of it; that it is a part of human nature to behave selfishly. Ethical egoists maintain that we should act selfishly; some even think that if every person just took care of herself/himself the world should be a better place for everybody. This puts a lot of trust to a person’s ability to know what is right or wrong for himself.

4.4.1 Applied to case 1: Kalle Kalle is certainly mainly thinking about himself and his own satisfaction when he pirate. This action maximizes his personal interest for the moment, which can be considered to be, respect, feeling of solidarity and increased confidence. The whole world will not become a better place if he acts in this egoistic way, but his immediately surrounding, his parents, is surly positively affected. On the other hand, if Kalle pirate he is in the end going to be negatively affected, by poorer supply of products. But as it is not likely that Kalle in that moment would think or care about that and it will not affect his actions. However, you can argue if Kalle really can take that responsibility? Has he really considered the possibility that he could get caught? In the reality the risk of being caught is rather low. In egoisms view Kalle is acting in an acceptable way.

4.4.2 Applied to case 2: Jörgen Jörgen is likely to act solely in his own interest. He wants the products as fast as he can get them. How

does not matter, he does not care about the law. He is not likely to receive a bad conscience as a consequence of his action, quite the opposite, he really enjoys and feels good about himself if he has mastered and solved an especially difficult task. As his action satisfies his own needs and creates feelings of self-importance it is according to ethical egoism a good and right action.

4.4.3 Applied to case 3: Sofia Sofia acts selfishly in the way that she wants something that she really cannot afford and comes over it by breaking the law. But she does it both for her children and for herself. As she is aware of that piracy is illegal and the fact that she would buy the software she needs if she could afford applies that she would receive a bad conscience by breaking the copyright law. The satisfactory feeling of having come over the programs is certainly going to fade or not be maximized if she had the nagging feeling that she has done something wrong and illegal. It is hard to say if that fact makes her action less good and less right in the eyes of an egoist.

4.5 Ethical Analysis: Virtue Ethics Applied Virtue ethics is about determining what kind of people we should be. In virtue ethics, actions are considered good and acceptable if they are supporting good character traits (virtues) and wrong if they support bad character traits (vices). Good character traits could be honesty, responsibility and loyalty. Vices could be the opposite, dishonesty, irresponsibility and disloyalty. Virtue ethics mean that we should try to better our character and the character of others

4.5.1 Applied to case 1: Kalle The actions Kalle are making are probably both leading to developing his character in a good way and in a bad way. The good development lies in that he is creating a better confidence and throw his friends he is developing his social skills, witch are important to have in society. The bad development is that he is doing something that is illegal. To break the law is not a favorable character trait and would therefore not make Kalle’s character any better. His parents do not help Kalle to develop his character by permitting him to do something illegal, but on the hand they make it possible for Kalle to enhance his character too.

4.5.2 Applied to case 2: Jörgen Jörgen character is not developed significantly by pirating; on the other hand it is really worsen it. He know that is it illegal to download, but he does it anyway. He has little respect for the law and as he is deliberately breaking it with a somewhat joyful mind, his action cannot be considered right, because it does

not support good character traits. It is rather supportive of the vices, which is a sigh of a wrong action.

4.5.3 Applied to case 3: Sofia One goal Sofia has when she downloads is to develop her competence in computer science; another is her will to make her children satisfied. That could be considered as a virtue, but she is breaking the law and that is a vice. However her character is likely to be more affected in the positive way than the negative way.

5 Summery and Conclusion The purpose with this paper was to figure out what drives people to pirate and how different ethical theories looks at it. There are numerous number of reason why a person pirate. The issue of money is clearly the most frequently excuse used. People are of the opinion that the products are too expensive and not worth their price. Many people cannot afford to buy them or simply does not want to pay the price. Other reasons are the easy access to pirated material. There are endless amounts of files to download, almost anything you want can be found. Others say that piracy is good exposure for the products. There are also some less evident reasons like social interaction through Internet and piracy and a need to express oneself.

Piracy has an impact on the copyright holders. They are for example missing income due to piracy. This could affect the public by poorer amount of well produced products and higher prices. If the companies’ income is lesser, the consequences could be lay-offs and cut wages for many employees. As the industry developing software is playing such a large part of the overall economics, there are a great amount of people that could be affected negatively by piracy.

The three cases (Kalle, Jörgen and Sofia) showed that there are some situations where piracy can be called, if not ethical, but not unethical. In Jörgen’s case, which basically was to download without any real reason despite the need to fast and easy get what he wants, indifferent to what the law says, it is quite obviously that he is committing an unethically act. All theories, accept ethical egoism, states that he is doing a wrongful act. Unfortunately, many of the pirates act similar to Jörgen, they might not have the same economic situation, but many have the possibility to save enough to buy the programs they need. Many, like Jörgen, lack the respect for the copyright law; they think the possibility to get caught is very low or nonexistent. Laws are often built on moral believes, and the copyright law is likely to spring from the moral belief that stealing is wrong. To pirate intellectual

property, like software, is theft just as much as for example taking a physical item without permission. However, it should be said that the laws are not always right, but that does not mean that the laws we think is wrong is acceptable to break. Societies that implement this are likely to be short lived. To say that you do not know the law is not a defence. You are required as a citizen to inform yourself about the laws.

Kalle’s and Sofia’s cases might seem unethical at the surface (they are breaking the law) but some of the ethically theories proved the opposite. Sofia act is not in any ethically theory clearly stated to be unethical as she is not producing a significant damage to herself, the copyright holder and the society as a whole. Kalle’s case is more difficult and more complex. As in many things there are several aspects of the problem. Kalle is benefiting from piracy in the way that he has created a social circle and has received more confidence and belief in himself and his abilities, but he is also permitted by his parents to break the law, what says that he is not going to believe that it is acceptable to also break other laws? On the other hand what would happen if they forbid him to do it? He could for example get depressed or turn to activities that can be more harmful and dangerous.

The conclusions is that in some circumstances piracy can be considered not unethical if analyzing those situations with different ethically theories. There is however the problem if these reasons can outweigh such heavy moral believes as that stealing it wrong. There is also the issue that we cannot really be sure of all the consequences piracy can have, there is no way for sure to tell how piracy committed now affect the future for the computer community and the public.

6 References [1] Drew Clark, How Copyright Became Controversial, National Journal Technology Daily

[2] Wagner Suzanne C and Sanders G Lawrence, Journal of Business Ethics, 2001

[3] Software Information Industry Association (SIIA), http://www.siia.net

[4] Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), http://www.eff.org (Email: eff@eff.org)

[5] Diane Lending and Sandra A. Slaughter, the Effects Climate on Attitudes and Behaviors Towards Software Piracy, ACM SIGCPR, 2001

[6] Richard Parker, Computer related crime: ethical considerations, ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, August 1990

[7] Business Software Alliance (BSA), http://www.bsa.org (Email: software@bsa.org)

[8] United States Copyright office, http://www.copyright.gov

[9] Deborah G. Johnsson, Computer Ethics, third edition (Prentice-Hall, 2001), ISBN 0-13-083699-0

[10] Sameer Hunduja, Trends and patterns among online software pirates, Ethics and Information Technology, June 2003

[11] Ram D. Gopal and G. Lawrence Sanders, Global Software Piracy: You can’t get blood of a turnip, communications of the ACM, September 2000

[12] Trevor T. Moores, Virtual Extension: The effect of national culture and economic wealth on global software piracy rates, Communications of the ACM, September 2003

[13] Charles B. Fleddermann, Engineering Ethics, (Prentice-Hall, 1999), ISBN 0-13-784224-4