My Answers to HWCase1, Q1

[singularityswebsite]

The source of my case is:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/jul/01/apple-google-patent-case-john-naughton-comment?CMP=twt_gu
as well as
https://www.reuters.com/article/apple-samsung/update-1-apple-launches-new-legal-attack-on-samsung-phones-idUSL4E8DD0KS20120213

For additional information on their other lawsuits view https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_Inc._litigation

Five important facts are

1. The lawsuit was started by Apple and the defendant was Google over patent infringement and Google's recent acquiring of Motorola.


2. A well-known high class judge named Richard Allen Posner got himself assigned to a lower court to deal with the case.


3. The patent Apple was suing Google over was based on the 'slide-to-unlock' feature that many phones have today.


4. Apple's reasoning for filing the lawsuit was because Google had a tap to unlock feature and Apple argued that a "tap is a zero-length swipe".


5. Posner threw the case out, but Apple has repeatedly sued other company's over similar things since the case originally occurred in 2012.

Three important questions to ask about the case are:

1. Apple has repeatedly sued companies for what most people consider basic functionality in phones, like swiping to unlock, home buttons, tap to zoom, on-screen icons, and even rectangles with rounded corners. Should companies like Apple be able to patent features such as these?


2. In many cases when companies that sue for patent infringement lose they don't experience any negative side effects. The judge threw out the case in this scenario, but Apple did not face any punishment. Should companies that pursue a patent infringement lawsuit and fail experience repercussions?


3. After having seen what Apple has done with patents in the tech field, many feel that they are stifling Innovation in the industry. Apple was the first company to have a major release in the smart phone field so it can be argued that they are right in their defense of this technology. Do you think that they are vindicated in their lawsuits, or do you think they are abusing the patent system? And if you don't agree, what could be done to fix the system they abuse?

Three additional standard questions:

• What does virtue ethics say about this case?


• What does utilitarianism say about this case?


• What does deontology say about this case?

Comments

Should companies like Apple be able to patent features such as these?

[discuss_ethics]

I think that it is unethical for companies to try to lock down accessibility features like a "press-to-unlock" feature. From a utilitarian viewpoint it would not be ethical to gatekeep these features, as less people would be able to utilize the device that the feature is on; smart phones in this case. Closed-source software does not allow for the free development of technology, which is essential to the rapid betterment and development of mankind. Thus, I feel that all closed-source software is unethical. Ensuring profits for an individual does nothing for the betterment of mankind as a whole.