Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.



No description

Alan Yeoh Loon

on 27 May 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Copy of BPMN 3123 MANAGEMENT ETHICS

Question 1 : Analyze this case from the perspective of each of the theories of private property described in this chapter (i.e., from perspective of Locke’s theory of private property, the utilitarian theory of private property and the Marxist theory of private property). Which of these view do you most agree with and which do you think is most appropriate for this case?

Question 2 : Do you agree that Accolade had “really stolen” Sega’s property? Explain why or why not.
Company Background
Question 3: In your judgment, did Accolade go too far in trying to discover the underlying source code of Sega’s programs? Does a company have a right to reverse engineer any product it wants?
From perspective of Locke’s theory of private property
When Accolade copies the code without permission from Sega, and utilized the secret codes that allow the game to work with Genesis consoles without permission, this could say that Accolade is infringed upon Sega’s private property rights.

In the nutshell, we think that Accolade’s reverse engineering was going too in this case. However, the company able to success in appeal is due to the lack of law protection in the copyright issue. There is no law against reverse engineering in US and that’s the major cause that Accolade could win this case. This case is another prove of “legally right but morally wrong” case. However, both Sega and Accolade agree to come to a ultimate settlement after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal overthrow the decision made by the District Court and eventually, Accolade had become one of the licensee of Sega after this case. It can be say that it’s a win-win situation that benefits both parties.
From the perspective of utilitarian theory of private property
Sega argue that Accolade’s creation of games is removing some of the incentive.
Accolade’s games are an asset to Sega’s sales, therefore not an infringement because Accolade’s games can make a profit to Sega.
From the perspective of Marxist theory
Productive property should not be “private” and the intellectual property should be share by society.
My answer is NO.
Firstly, there is no rule and law against the reverse engineering in United Stated.
In the beginning Accolade is prospered by making and marketing games that could be played on Sega game consoles and Sega had not granted Accolade a license to make games for its consoles and derived no income from sales of Accolade game.
The Sega Corporation, usually styled as SEGA, is a Japanese multinational video game developer, publisher, and hardware development company headquartered in Tokyo, Japan, with multiple offices around the world.

Accolade, Inc. was an American video game developer and publisher of the 1980s and 1990s. Headquartered in San Jose, California, it was founded in 1984 by game industry veterans Alan Miller and Bob Whitehead.
In my opinion, I agree with the first decision that made by the U.S. District Court because I feel that the product that launched by Sega was the hard work and private invention of the engineers of the company.
In this case, Sega’s programs do not affect any persons, but only will cause profit losses to Accolade. In another word, Accolade is really going too far to discover the underlying source code of Sega’s programs when Sega launch their new products.
I also think that Accolade had actually invaded the rights of intelligence and the copyright law by doing reverse engineering to the products of Sega. Therefore, I’m disagreeing with the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
A company does not have the right to reverse engineer any product as it wish, in fact, after this case happen, the government had actually amend the law to prevent the same thing happen in the future.
After the settlement between this two company, Accolade was finally become a licensee of Sega and it finally can released their products under license.

Full transcript