Unavoidable Ethical Questions About Open Source
These questions follow the Markkula Center for Applied Ethics
"Framework
for Ethical Decision Making."
From a Utilitarian Perspective
Questions about the greatest good vis-à-vis open source
software mirror larger discussions about intellectual property
protection. Is human knowledge advanced by full and free access
to all information, allowing engineers and developers to correct
and improve on already existing systems? Or does a lack of strong
protection for IP discourage innovation by removing the financial
incentive for developing it? What is the balance of these potential
benefits over these potential harms?
From a Rights Perspective
According to the Free Software Foundation, free software “is
a matter of liberty, not price. To understand the concept, you
should think of ‘free’ as in ‘free speech,’
not as in ‘free beer.’” Classically, free speech
is understood as a right, but is this a useful way to think
about open source software? Is there anything in the nature
of software that would give people a right to it in the same
way that we have a right to speech?
From a Fairness Perspective
Is it fair to expect software developers to create and distribute
their intellectual product without restrictions while we do
not expect the same from other inventors or producers?
From a Common Good Perspective
The Vatican document “Ethics in Internet” argues that
“use of the new information technology…needs to be
informed and guided by a resolute commitment to the practice
of solidarity in the service of the common good.” Flowing
from this view, the document says that “cyberspace ought
to be a resource of comprehensive information and services available
without charge to all, and in a wide range of languages. The
winner in this process will be humanity as a whole and not just
a wealthy elite that controls science, technology, and the planet's
resources.” Is this view applicable to software as well?
From a Virtue Perspective
Richard Stallman, often called the founder of the free software
movement, has argued that “for beings that can think and
learn, sharing useful knowledge is a fundamental act of friendship.
When these beings use computers, this act of friendship takes
the form of sharing software…. This spirit of goodwill—the
spirit of helping your neighbor, voluntarily—is society's
most important resource. It makes the difference between a livable
society and a dog-eat-dog jungle.” But to others, “sharing”
software is like having to consent to its theft because the
sharer is giving away someone’s work product, which is
the result of sweat and ingenuity and which has monetary value,
as well. Will open source inculcate the virtues of friends or
of thieves?
|
