In analyzing the ethics of marketing Publius, using the utilitarianism, rights, justice and caring ethics, we can gain a better knowledge of these examples within a particular case.
Utilitarianism is a general term for any view that holds that actions and policies should be evaluated on the basis of the benefits and costs in which they will impose on society. In this situation, it means that the "right" action or policy is the one that will produce the greatest benefits or lowest net costs. In the Publius case, it seems from the utilitarianism point of view that it would not be ethical to market Publius, as it may do more harm than good to society. Bruce Taylor, an anti-pornography activist, stated: "who wants to be more anonymous than criminals, terrorists, child molesters and pornographers, hackers and e-mail virus punks"?
Rights are the individual entitlements to freedom of choice and well-being. Rights protect interests such as free speech, freedom of religion and the right to education, at least in the U.S. In consideration of one's rights, it would be ethical to market Publius to people who might actually use the software for good. The creators of Publius hoped that their software would help people in countries where freedom of speech was not a right, and people were punished for speaking out. They said the ideal user of Publius was "a person in China observing abuses of human rights on a day to day basis". However, it seems to me that it would be hard to get such software in a country with such restricted internet access and general censorship due to it's own the government rules. Justice principles consider that the morally correct action is the one that produces a fair distribution of benefits and costs, good and harm. In other words, it looks at how burdens and benefits are distributed among people. A general fairness principle in justice is that people who are similar in relevant respects should be treated similarly, and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document