|
|
Facing the Computer Ethics Dilemma C. Dianne Martin and David H. Martin
Although the major professional societies have developed codes of ethics, they have been criticized for failing to establish sanctions, enforce them or test their applicability in the real world. Because the codes have been so rarely applied to actual situations, they have not undergone the years of interpretation and practical analysis to which ethics codes in other professions have been subjected. Instead the legal system is being used to settle an increasing number of issues related to computers. Since 1958 there have been over 2,500 reported cases of intentionally caused losses in which computers played a major part or were essential to the scheme (Parker, et al., 1988, p. 2). This situation has prompted the enactment of computer crime statutes in most states as well as two federal laws, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986. Legality, however, falls far short of what is required for high standards of ethical conduct and awareness. Leaders in the computer field need to recognize the ethical conflicts faced by computer professionals and to establish ethical standards that are practicable in both the computer science and business communities. Brian Kocher (1989), past President of the ACM, stated that computer professionals must start to police themselves with licensing and certification standards established by the professional societies, or else lawmakers would wrest that prerogative from them by enacting ill-conceived legislation to regulate their activities. Hoffman (1988), a computer security expert, suggested that professional computer users, like automobile drivers, must be licensed if they intend to use their computers in other than a stand-alone mode in their own home or office. This is similar to the on-road versus farm use of motor vehicles. Computer professionals would have their license revoked if they turned from computer user to computer abuser. Such suggestions of licensing or self-policing are not merely hypothetical musings. There are ample precedents of industries or professions where, given the opportunity to engage in self-policing and having failed to effectively mount adequate programs, the government has used a legislative sledgehammer to force a change. The most recent and highly visible example has been in the government procurement arena, in particular in the defense procurement industry. Concerned with recurring scandals in the defense industry, former President Reagan appointed a Blue Ribbon Panel on Defense Procurement to advise him on how to bring under control the excesses incurred by government contractors that implicated corporate management at the highest levels. The cornerstone of the Blue Ribbon Panel’s recommendations was a self-policing program that included the following recommendation: when the company, through its own programs, uncovered fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement, it should voluntarily disclose such things to the government. This program of self-policing was not particularly successful because of the fear of civil or criminal proceedings that might flow from such disclosure. Complaints continued, and Congress passed legislation to require mandatory ethics training for defense contractors and for their government counterparts. Also required was a certification with each contract that the defense contractor is familiar with the laws and regulations relating to government contracting and that they have no information concerning a “violation or possible violation of the laws and regulations (Public Law 100 – 679, 1988).” A false certification is subject to criminal penalties. Go to: Computer Ethics Education Home > Research Resources > Computing and Privacy > Facing the Computer Ethics Dilemma |
||
HOME | IN
THE NEWS | RESEARCH RESOURCES The Research Center on Computing & Society |