On the Conflicts of a Universal Computer Code of Ethics Abstract: The difficulty of having a global ethical standard of conduct for computing professionals is due to the fact that there are conflicting legitimate loyalties and interests. This article examines an ethical issue in the professional computing world through the use of a case study. The example given is that of a programmer who is asked to install new software on his computer. He realizes that the software may have been obtained illegally and investigates. Since no one can prove to him that the software has a legitimate or illegitimate origin, he is faced with the dilemma of whether to ignore the problem or report it and bring it into the public sphere. The Code of Ethics of a typical IT company is examined for clues as to what ethical action the worker should take next. Ethical dilemmas can be difficult to resolve due to the nature of personal loyalties. We are all taught to respect the law, to listen to our parents, and to be obedient to our employers. What would happen if, however, one of these loyalties conflicted with each other? Our loyalty may suddenly be called into question. We may be forced to choose what is most important to us, making decisions that could change our relationship with our faithful. The following case is an example of such an ethical dilemma, in which an employee must first determine whether a conflict actually exists and second what action to take if the conflict actually exists. We use this case to analyze the conflicts inherent in having a Universal Code of Ethics for IT professionals. In this analysis we focus on ethical conflicts and do not consider problems arising from specialties or technical changes. Consider the following imaginary situation: Rawley works for a small Internet consulting firm that designs and implements web portals. He is an expert in implementing the backend of sites. One day, however, Rawley's manager asks him to work on the website design. His manager says the project is behind schedule and needs more workers. He also promises that this will not become a long-term project: it will last no more than a month. Since Rawley has done this type of work for previous employers, he doesn't think it will be difficult to do it here. He agrees to take the job. To begin his new assignment, Rawley must install new software on his computer. He goes to the technical support team and receives the software upon request. However, it is not what he expected. Instead of the original disc, he receives a CD-R disc with the name of the program and the CD key handwritten on it. Rawley immediately becomes suspicious and asks his colleagues who have already installed this program if they also used this copied disk. They had done it. Should Rawley be concerned at this point that the program was obtained illegally? Or should it leave the responsibility for copyright infringement to the technical department? Unsure of how to proceed, Rawley returns to the tech support staff and asks about the disk. They are told that the copy is of an original they have kept. Okay, Rawley thinks, and asks for the original disc and documentation. The technical staff worker searches for the package and returns empty-handed. Rawley is told that it must have been lost during the company's move to a new office six months earlier. Returning to his desk, Rawley reflects on the situation. Why is the original lost but the copy is still around? Should he report this to his manager? Or, since he has no concrete reason to suspect illegal activity, he shouldignore his concerns and install the software? Reasoning that it would be harmless, Rawley goes to tell his manager the situation. His manager, unperturbed by the situation, quickly tells Rawley not to worry. She assures him that the original disk will be found sooner or later, and that he shouldn't waste any more time worrying about the situation. Thus the ethical dilemma arises: on the one hand, Rawley's company is unable to demonstrate to him that the software is legal. It seems to him that no one really cares about copyright laws or that he is trying to hide his involvement in stealing the software. And even if the disk was a copy of an original, does the company have enough software licenses to allow another user, Rawley, to use the program at the same time as his colleagues? On the other hand, though, is Rawley just overreacting and worrying unnecessarily? It could very well be true that the disc is actually a copy of an original and that the company lost the original box during the move. And surely the company has enough licenses for its workers. And even if not, he will only participate in the project temporarily and after a month he will no longer need the software. Should the company really have to pay for another software license for such a short-term project? There are probably workers who have the software but don't use it. Therefore Rawley could use his license temporarily. And, at the same time, it is not its job to deal with software piracy issues. It's not the technical staff that deals with these things, and they wouldn't be punished if copyright infringement was actually proven. To evaluate Rawley's arguments in ethical terms, let's consider the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct published by the Association of Information Technology Professionals (AITP).1 The AITP breaks down the Code of Ethics into four employee obligations: to management, colleagues and profession, society and employer. The following are selective excerpts from the AITP Standard of Conduct that address Rawley's ethical issue. As an obligation to management, Rawley is to "share his knowledge with others and present factual, objective information to management to the best of [his] ability." This obligation was fully respected. Rawley discussed the matter with his manager, telling him all the details he knew about the situation. Here he undoubtedly did the ethically correct thing. As an obligation to his employer, Rawley is to "avoid conflicts of interest and ensure that [his] employer is aware of any potential conflicts." Rawley notified his employer of a potential problem. It's safe to say that Rawley "[presented] a fair, honest, and objective point of view" to his manager, while also showing his concern for the legitimacy of the software. There are several responsibilities that Rawley has to his colleagues and to the profession as an IT professional. The first is “to be honest in all [] professional dealings.” Rawley took this responsibility, as he did not hide from anyone that he suspected that the disk had been obtained illegally. He also attempted to "cooperate with others to achieve understanding and identify problems." However, the people he spoke to, the coaching staff and his manager, didn't seem to take the matter seriously enough to take any action once the problem was identified. Rawley also had an obligation to "take appropriate action regarding any illegal or unethical practices that [come] to [his] attention." Is there enough evidence to take action against the company? 47-50.