Defining educational policy on software usage in the light of copyright law

Crow, Galen B.

doi:10.1145/65294.71192

SIGCSE Bull.

1989

DOI: 10.1145/65294.71192

|View full text |Cite

Defining educational policy on software usage in the light of copyright law

Galen B. Crow

Abstract: Accompanying the rapid proliferation of personal computing has been an ambivalent attitude towards the illegal copying of commercially available software. The effects of this software “piracy” are enormous and insidious, and academia ranks as one of the worst abusers. To understand the legitimate as well as illegitimate usage of software, one must have a clear understanding of the letter and intent of the copyright law. If academia is to purge itself of software abuses, educators and administrators must set cl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2004

2009

Publication Types

Select...

Article4

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent4

Authors

Journals

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Unauthorized copying of software and levels of moral development: a literature analysis and its implications for research and practice

Siponen

Vartiainen

2004

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several approaches for and against the unauthorized copying of software have been proposed. These approaches can be divided into two categories: moral reasoning and solution. These categories of approaches to unauthorized copying of software are scrutinized in the light of Kohlberg's theory of Cognitive Moral Development. The results suggest that most approaches presenting solutions to unauthorized copying of software have focused attention on the lower levels of moral development, while approaches at the highest stage are few and far between. No single approach covers all the stages of moral development. The implications of this analysis for practice and research are discussed.

show abstract

Unauthorized copying of software and levels of moral development: a literature analysis and its implications for research and practice

Siponen

Vartiainen

2004

Information Systems Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A justification for software rights

Siponen

2004

SIGCAS Comput. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been debated whether unauthorized copying of computer software is morally justified and whether developers or software companies can own software and require users to pay for its use. Four views in favour of unauthorized copying of software can be distinguished: 'free software' (Stallman), the landlord analogy (Nissenbaum), the 'non-exclusiveness argument' (Weckert, Ladd) and 'it is justified to copy a program that we would never buy' (Weckert). Considerations regarding these issues can be retraced to the three foundations of rights: inherited rights that are already in place, agreed rights, and no rights. From the viewpoint of agreed rights, rights are based on agreement and negotiation, and, referring to the universalizability theses by Rawls and Hare, I argue that it is justified that developers or software companies 'own' their software. I discuss the economic and social effects of free SW, understood as the abolition of financial acknowledgements, suggested by Stallman. I conclude that such free (non-commercial) software would give rise to socio-political changes toward systems that are something other than liberal-based (e.g., socialism). Again, I argue that we have a reason to object to Stallman's program in the light of the universalizability theses. Nevertheless, even if one were to perceive this as a convincing goal, it is questionable whether one should make unauthorized copies on these grounds in a society that does not function on such lines: one should first seek to change the norms and practices of one's society. This is further argued to be advisable, since it is not obvious that adhering to software copyright in the general sense is unfair or irrelevant. For these reasons, we should take violation of the laws governing software copying seriously. Finally, I criticize the non-exclusiveness argument, the landlord analogy and the view that 'is it justified to copy a program that we would never buy'.

show abstract

A justification for software rights

SiponenMikko

2006

SIGCAS Comput. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been debated whether unauthorized copying of computer software is morally justified and whether developers or software companies can own software and require users to pay for its use. Four views in favour of unauthorized copying of software can be distinguished: 'free software' (Stallman), the landlord analogy (Nissenbaum), the 'non-exclusiveness argument' (Weckert, Ladd) and 'it is justified to copy a program that we would never buy' (Weckert). Considerations regarding these issues can be retraced to the three foundations of rights: inherited rights that are already in place, agreed rights, and no rights. From the viewpoint of agreed rights, rights are based on agreement and negotiation, and, referring to the universalizability theses by Rawls and Hare, I argue that it is justified that developers or software companies 'own' their software. I discuss the economic and social effects of free SW, understood as the abolition of financial acknowledgements, suggested by Stallman. I conclude that such free (noncommercial) software would give rise to socio-political changes toward systems that are something other than liberal-based (e.g., socialism). Again, I argue that we have a reason to object to Stallman's program in the light of the universalizability theses. Nevertheless, even if one were to perceive this as a convincing goal, it is questionable whether one should make unauthorized copies on these grounds in a society that does not function on such lines: one should first seek to change the norms and practices of one's society. This is further argued to be advisable, since it is not obvious that adhering to software copyright in the general sense is unfair or irrelevant. For these reasons, we should take violation of the laws governing software copying seriously. Finally, I criticize the non-exclusiveness argument, the landlord analogy and the view that 'is it justified to copy a program that we would never buy'.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Defining educational policy on software usage in the light of copyright law

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Unauthorized copying of software and levels of moral development: a literature analysis and its implications for research and practice

Unauthorized copying of software and levels of moral development: a literature analysis and its implications for research and practice

A justification for software rights

A justification for software rights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About