Ethical Issue Essay: ETH 301 Module 2 case assignment (rox)
Module 2 - Case
Informational Privacy
If the law does not keep pace with technological developments, and it always seems to be at least one step behind, the consequences can be devastating, even in the seemingly simplest of things. What could be more technologically routine these days than email? And yet......
Justin Ellsworth was a Marine who gave his life for his country. By all accounts he was a brave and fine Marine and we all owe him the highest debt of gratitude. But we were also left with a serious question, what to do with his email? His parents wanted access. They wanted to see what their son had to say. However, email is a private sort of thing. Yahoo, his email provider, had a terms of service agreement with him. And while we sympathize greatly with his parents, there is also a precedent to be concerned about. One can't simply waive away the privacy issue as a decision to release the information could have serious consequences for email privacy for us all. So the issue needs to be discussed, thought through, and resolved. That is why we have cases like this in a class like this, so we can think these things through and try to respect the family, the deceased, and the needs of society. So I ask you:
Should Justin Ellsworth's Parents have been given access to his email?
Case Expectations:
Please answer this question in three to five pages. Be sure to assess, separately with thorough explanations, the utilitarian and deontological considerations.
Please go to the web and to our cyberlibraries and find as much as you can on this case.
You can read about it by going to Proquest:
Who gets to see the e-mail of the deceased?
Susan Llewelyn Leach Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor. Christian Science Monitor. Boston, Mass.: May 2, 2005. pg. 12; Retrieved on August 28, 2012 from PProquest.
Abstract
Yet many legal experts say Yahoo! acted correctly. It denied the family's informal request and only yielded under court order. "I would hope that the Yahoo! position here would become a trade practice - that e-mail would only be released if a judge approved it," says Gerald Ferrera, executive director of the Cyberlaw Center at Bentley College in Waltham, Mass.
For Yahoo!'s part, the company says it still stands behind its commitment to treat each user's e-mail as private and confidential. "We are pleased that the court has issued an order resolving this matter ... and allowing Yahoo! to continue upholding our privacy commitment to our users," says Yahoo! spokeswoman Mary Osako.
Most people leave their privacy in the hands of e-mail providers, rarely reading through the terms of service and privacy policy before clicking the "I agree" box. Yahoo! states that its accounts are nontransferable and that "rights to the Yahoo! I.D. and contents within the account terminate upon death." Destroying the data once the contract ends simplifies life for Internet service providers (ISPs), says Mr. [Alan Chappell].
General Expectations:
Your paper should be double-spaced with 12-point font.
Your paper should have a separate cover page and a separate reference page for your in-text citations in addition to the body of your paper.
Use APA-style.
Be sure to proofread your paper.
Upload your paper to Coursenet by the end of the module.
Ethical Issues
Name:
Institution:
Ethical issues have a way of tying in with the legal aspects for centuries and will do so for much longer decades to come. One such incidence concerned Justin Ellsworth, who was a marine and died in the line of duty, but that was not the bone of contention. Rather, after his death the parents requested that all his belongings be forwarded to them including his email correspondence. Before his death like most citizens, Justin was in contract with the Yahoo, who provided him with the services of delivering his emails. As part of the contract, Yahoo requires that one agrees with the terms and condition of service, which in this case included the term stating that the accounts are not transferable and will be terminated upon death, unless a court law decides otherwise. When Yahoo declined to forward the pass details of their son’s account, the parents went to court to demand their rights on the same. This is an incident that caused quite the stir in the social media and in most of the blogs. Most of the people felt that it is not in the interest of the deceased to have their private mail handed down to any other persons as they have not authorised the same. As such, most people felt that Yahoo acted in the best interest of their client’s right to privacy. There were personal reasons as to why the son had not taken the step to share his email password, all of which were best known to him. Given that he was now dead and had no say in the matter, it was only fair that the terms of agreement were honoured.
The normative ethical theory of utilitarianism, define the locus of right and wrong along the line of the outcomes of our actions. With referencing the outcomes/consequences, the scope of the theory extends beyond the personal interests and onto the interests of other persons we interact with. With reference to this theory, Yahoo acted in the best of interests for its client, by safe guarding his privacy in death. When they got into a contract with Justine, Yahoo committed to protecting the privacy of the contents of the emails that he sent or received. Given that most of the time, the emails contain a private life that people live other than the face they put out to the public, the consequences of exposing these emails could have an outfall that is unprecedented. These are the kind of outcomes, which in the interest of the deceased should be carefully guarded, to avoid sceneries that could dent his reputation. With regard to the parents, accessing their son’s emails beats the reasons for privacy. When Justine was alive, he never at one point indicates...