FOUR REPLIES DUE IN 24 HOURS
combs
Respondtothespecificquestionsposedinthediscussion.docx· Respond to the specific questions posed in the discussion.
· Be sure to base your initial post and responses on course materials, and use 7th ed. APA citations in every post.
· Post your responses over three days and respond to four or more students to receive full credit for frequency of participation.
· Write clearly and proofread; errors can lose you points.
· Quality of posts, citations, frequency, and timeliness of posts all factor into your discussion grade. See the Participation Grading Rubric for details.
ANGELA’S POST:
Good morning class,
· Who are the stakeholders in this and how might they be affect by Apple's decision?
The stakeholders would be any Apple user, if Apple decides to use the appropriate tool to open the gunman's Apple I phone it will also compromise all other Apple I phone user privacy. If Apple does not comply then the FBI might have to find other means to open the I Phone and get the appropriate data that they need.
· What decision benefits the greatest number of these stakeholders?
The decision to not comply with the FBI's request.
· Do you agree with the decision that utilitarianism leads you to? Why or why not?
Utilitarianism is defined as, "the philosophical approach which says that the moral act is the one that creates the greatest happiness or good for the greater number of people" (Gilbert, 2016). I agree with the decision that Utilitarianism leads me, we as the people would not benefit if Apple does not stand its ground with user privacy, but then the FBI is not satisficed with this decision. Apple and the FBI must come to a decision that will help both parties such as finding a way to unlock the I Phone with out compromising other users data.
· Does apply the test in Rights and Duties or Fairness and Justice lead you to a different answer?
No, ultimately I believe that he Rights and Duties or Fairness aligns with my decision. For example we have the right to privacy and if we choose to pruchase an Apple I phone then they have that duty to uphold and ensure my privacy.
Joseph Gilbert. (2016). Ethics for Managers : Philosophical Foundations and Business Realities: Vol. Second edition. Routledge.
ANTONIO’S POST:
Utilitarianism is defined as the philosophical approach which dictates if a moral act creates the greatest happiness or good for the biggest number of people (Gilbert, Chapter 4, 2016).
Based on the San Bernandino and Pensacola scenario, the stakeholders can be the owners, director, any personnel assigned to the customers and most importantly the customers. Stakeholders can affect the company decision due to not desiring to have bad publicity due to helping the authorities with the requested information.
The decision taken to assist the authorities was the correct one, providing all the available information to the authorities. Apple did provide all the available information that the company had in order to assist preventing the terrorist attack. Only issue is that it was not enough since Apple encrypts their phones information and can only be unlocked with the user’s password (Nicas & Benner, 2020). Company cannot bypass that security even if desired, unless creating a new tool which will allow them to do so. Tool can be used in the future to invade user privacy, even if not necessarily when trying to prevent criminal acts.
Bases on the definition of utilitarianism, I do agree with the decision. By providing all the available information to the authorities, company looked for the good of the greatest number of people. Company did all on its hands to assist by supporting all the data available, nothing else.
Rights and duties, the second ethics approach, refers to the approach on people doing things that are right for themselves, instead of their consequences (Gilbert, Chapter 5, 2016). As for fairness and duties, it refers to approaching reasoning based on the moral act threats similarities in people in similar ways with the process and outcome (Gilbert, Chapter 6, 2016).. After reviewing Rights and duties; and fairness and justice, I would have to say it did not lead to a different answer. Company provided all the current information to the authorities. Creating a “backdoor” to access the user’s information, who can lead to users information been jeopardized, it’s not the correct method to solve this issue.
References:
Gilbert, J. (2016). Chapter 4; Utilitarianism. Retrieved from https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook?sid=982c5e6f-5ac5-41cd-9c47-62634cd24292%40redis&ppid=pp_48&vid=0&format=EB
Gilbert, J. (2016). Chapter 5, Rights and Duties. Retrieved from https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook?sid=982c5e6f-5ac5-41cd-9c47-62634cd24292%40redis&ppid=pp_48&vid=0&format=EB
Gilbert, J. (2016). Chapter 6, Fairness and Justice. Retrieved from https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook?sid=982c5e6f-5ac5-41cd-9c47-62634cd24292%40redis&ppid=pp_48&vid=0&format=EB
Moser, R. & Mcdonald, P. (n.d.). The FBI & App le: Security vs. Privacy. Retrieved from https://learn.umgc.edu/content/enforced/683418-001154-01-2225-OL1-6383/21-The-FBI-Apple-Security-vs.-Privacy.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=7KGGWB71MB2nef9DFC2A5pE1E
Nicas, J. & Benner K. (2020, Jan 7). F.B.I. Asks Apple to Help Unlock Two iPhones. Retrieved from
BENJAMIN’S POST:
Hello all, please see below for my initial input.
At least twice, as part of a counterterrorism investigation, the FBI requested that Apple hack into an iPhone in the hopes of collecting information that could assist in preventing another attack. I have attached a case study that was carried out in 2015, as well as a link to an article that was published in The New York Times earlier this year that outlines the occurrence. Both of these items may be found in the further resources section. It would be helpful if you could put on the masquerade of Tim Cook and reach a decision about the latest request made by the FBI. Mr. Cook adheres to the utilitarian attitude when it comes to making decisions based on his extensive experience in the business world.
· Who are the stakeholders in this and how might they be affect by Apple's decision?
Apple is a private tech company that does not do any kind of work for the US government. Apple's stakeholders include people who use the company's products and technologies, investors, and US citizens. Apple's security rules say that making a backdoor and telling hackers and terrorists who target technology about it is not a good idea. This could put users' privacy at risk if the access point to the back door got into the wrong hands. If people found out that Apple wasn't doing everything it could to protect their personal information, sales of Apple devices could go down and the trust that Apple has built with its customers could be hurt. People may be worried about their own safety because, in case of a mass shooting or terrorist attack, they may want the US government to get access to devices for national security purposes to stop another attack.
· What decision benefits the greatest number of these stakeholders?
Apple's devices should not have any backdoors. This decision would help the greatest number of people. The built-in security and encryption of products like iPhones is a big reason why people want to use them. Apple users would be seriously jeopardized if the corporation built a backdoor to evade present security measures. On mobile devices, personal information, passwords, and even medical records are frequently safeguarded. If a back door is built, this information might be stolen, setting a dangerous precedent for future user privacy and cybersecurity.
· Do you agree with the decision that utilitarianism leads you to? Why or why not?
I'm forced to make a decision in favor of Apple customers' privacy because of utilitarianism. Ethics that promote social well-being will be prioritized by utilitarianism (Gilbert, 2016, "Utilitarianism," para. 2). The majority of users will be pleased with this change. I believe that personal data and information should be protected, but I also place a high value on national security. If there is a threat of a terrorist attack, I believe that law enforcement should take all precaution possible.
· Does apply the test in Rights and Duties or Fairness and Justice lead you to a different answer?
The result of applying the rights and obligations method would be the same as that of the utilitarianism approach. According to Gilbert (2016), "Rights and Duties," paragraph 4, the rights and duties approach places a greater emphasis on the individual rights of the person in question. This would imply in defending the consumers' right to privacy as well as their security. Apple users. The approach that prioritizes fairness and justice will work in the federal government's favor more than it will work against it. When access to users' devices is required for reasons of national security, the federal government will be able to utilize the method that is deemed most appropriate thanks to this strategy. According to Gilbert (2016), "Fairness and Justice" paragraph 9, justice and fairness will always involve the distribution of advantages and burdens to more than one person. In this scenario, in order for justice to be served, Apple customers would have to bear the burden of the possibility that their devices would be hacked or that the federal government would be surveilled.
References:
Gilbert, Joseph. (2016). Ethics for Managers: Philosophical Foundations and Business Realities.Routledge.
CrashCourse. (2016, Nov 21). Utilitarianism: Crash Course Philosophy #36 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a739VjqdSI
CHRISTOPHER’S POST:
The stakeholders in this situation are clearly the users of Apple products. Additionally, there are shareholder, investors, and technology developers that play a significant role or would be affected in this situation as well for the Apple side of this situation. The FBI, government parties, and even the average every day citizen can be looked at as stakeholders as well. Allowing this type of situation to play out the way the FBI intended it to, would violate the first amendment and could potentially threaten the privacy of all iPhone users (Moser & McDonald, n.d.). Apple allowing this type of thing to take place would cause for major concern to its users and threaten future sales on its products. Furthermore, shareholders, investors and even employees could have a negative view of the way Apple conducts business with putting other agencies priorities ahead of what is best for the users of their products. The public concerns would be at what point does Apple does not give into an outside entity anytime they ask for their help.
Many stakeholders in this situation would be on the Apple side of the house. By apple not allowing this type of thing to happen benefit them and instills further trust and does not compromise users’ data (Nicas & Benner, 2017).
Utilitarianism leads me to favor Apple and the privacy of their users. Most of the winners in this situation are going to be the apple users. I am in favor and agree that user personal identifiable information is important and needs to be protected. That information in the wrong hands can lead to major issues. At the same time, I am strongly against terrorist attacks, and if there was data with on a reasonably doubt that this information can stop it, I would want government agencies to be able to prevent it.
The Right and Duties would lead me to the same outcome as utilitarianism. The Right and Duties focuses on individual rights (Gilbert, 2016, "Rights and Duties" para. 4). Meaning protecting the security and privacy of Apple users. However, the Fairness and Justice leans more towards the best interest for the government’s thoughts. This allows government agencies to access the individuals’ devices when it’s in the best interest for national security.
References:
Gilbert, J. (2016). Ethics for Managers: Philosophical Foundations and Business Realities. https://eds-s-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.umgc.edu/eds/ebookviewer/ebook?sid=7666c139-3297-4d41-b94f-b0eefd0dacea%40redis&ppid=pp_48&vid=0&format=EB
Moser, M., & McDonald, P. (N.D.). Case Study: The FBI & Apple: Security vs. Privacy. https://learn.umgc.edu/content/enforced/683418-001154-01-2225-OL1-6383/21-The-FBI-Apple-Security-vs.-Privacy.pdf?_&d2lSessionVal=LFGCtF9Up2bmF476IHFkOwc6n
Nicas, J., & Benner, K. (January 7 2020). New York Times (Online). https://www.proquest.com/news/docview/2333999028/6A9FCFA903A74355PQ?parentSessionId=%2FCQFLOylKtIrI%2FIzWnL9aBW8%2BMYLGRB1xDAAaNmoKjc%3D&accountid=14580
