ECS 3361-6

Class 6
10/04/12

Unrelated News
Review of key parts of Class 5
Discuss Ch 4 Intellectual Property
Discuss the Pentium Chip Flaw

ECS 3361-6
My Trip (as if you care)

ECS 3361-6
Class 5 Review
Personality Types
Two types of classification
Free on-line assessment
Did anyone take the assessment?

Harvard Business Review Executive Psychopaths

ECS 3361-6
Intellectual Property

What is Intellectual Property

Protecting Intellectual Property
Copyright and Fair Use
Challenges

ECS 3361-6
What is Intellectual Property?
Any unique product of intellect that may have
commercial value
Books, songs, movies
Paintings, drawings
Inventions, chemical formulas, computer programs

Intellectual property is not physical property

In a corporation, for liability, these two forms of property need to
be kept separate.

ECS 3361-6
Protecting IP
Two competing goals:
Benefiting the society want inventions to reach the public
domain without delay
Rewarding the creators want to promote future inventions

Solution:
Govt grants limited ownership rights to IP creators

Protection Types:
Trademarks, Trade secrets, Patents, and Copyrights

ECS 3361-6
Trademarks

A trademark is a word, a logo, a sound, etc, that

identifies a company or a product.
Protections:
Company can sue for improper use of its trademark
However, if a trademark name becomes common
noun, trademark may be lost. E.g.
aspirin, escalator, thermos, Xerox, yo-yo

ECS 3361-6
Trade Secrets
A trade secret is a confidential piece of IP that provides
a company with a competitive advantage. E.g.
the formula for Coca-Cola syrup
the internal design of a system
customer lists

Protections:
Owners must take active measures to keep their trade secrets
from being discovered
Locked boxes
Non-disclosure agreements (NDA) and non-compete clauses
May involve several levels - Discuss

The Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA)

Imposes civil liability for misappropriation of trade secrets

ECS 3361-6

Patents
A public document that provides detailed
description of invention.
Provides owner with exclusive right to the invention
Owner can prevent others from making, using, or
selling invention for 20 years (this term has changed
over time, depending on when the patent was filed).
Time clock starts with filing of provisional patent, if
applicable.

ECS 3361-6
Patents
Heres one of my patent
applications under
review.
A easy free way to view
patents is at
www.pat2pdf.org

ECS 3361-6
Copyrights
Provides owner of an original work five rights

Reproduction
Distribution
Public display
Public performance
Production of derivative works

The length of the protection is defined by copyright laws

(which have been expanded greatly over the years).

ECS 3361-6
Fair Use
Under some circumstances, it is legal to reproduce a
copyrighted work without permission.
Courts consider four factors:

Purpose and character of use

Educational use is generally OK
Nature of work
Nonfiction and non-arts work are more permissible
Amount of work being copied
Small portions are more permissible
Effect on the commercial market for work
Should have a negligible effect

ECS 3361-6
Fair Use Examples
A professor scan a few journal articles and post them on
his class website. Students in class use password to
access. (OK)
An art professor takes slide photos of some paintings
from a book, and uses the slides in her lectures. (Maybe
not OK)
Discuss

ECS 3361-6
IP Protection Challenges
Digital copies:
Easy to make perfect copies of CDs, DVDs
Easy to download books, music, and videos
Peer-to-peer network allow strangers to share music and other data
files

The RIAA has filed more than 26,000 lawsuits against individuals
for illegal downloading since 2003.
Tanya Andersen (case dropped)
Jammie Thomas (fined $222K for sharing 24 songs)

Fair Use Issues:

How to draw the line?
How to protect legal fair use right?

Software Protection?
Should software be copyrighted?
Should software be patented?

ECS 3361-6
Answers to the Challenges
Prevention
Digital IP Protection Techniques (e.g. DRMs)
Tracking
Digital Watermarking

Punishing
Extending Copyright Laws

This is an on-going process. Some of the changes are

controversial.

Whatever happened to the good old cassette days?

Discuss?

ECS 3361-6
Significant Fair Use Cases
Sony v. Universal City Studios [1976]:
Issue: Using VCR to tape TV programs for later viewing
Verdict: Time shifting is fair use. (US Supreme Court 5-4)

RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia Systems [1998]:

Issue: Transforming music CDs to MP3 format and playing on
the Rio player
Verdict: Space shifting is fair use.

ECS 3361-6
Significant Reverse Engineering Cases
Sega v. Accolade [1992]:
Issue: Accolade made video games to run on Sega game
machines; to do so, they decompiled Segas game engine
Verdict: Reverse engineering does not violate copyright if the
intention is to make new creative works, not copy the original
work

Atari v. Nintendo [1992]

Sony v. Connectix [2000]

ECS 3361-6
Significant File Sharing Cases
RIAA v. Napster [2001]:
Issue: Peer-to-peer music exchange network
Verdict: Web sites could be liable for users' actions if they took
measures that deliberately encouraged users to do illegal things
(Secondary Infringement)
Background:
Napster was started by a Northeastern student in the summer of 1999. In
two years, it had 26 million registered users.
In court, Napster argued that it did not copy any files; it merely providing a
directory service.

MGM v. Grokster [2005]:

Issue: Decentralized p2p file-sharing network
Verdict: In favor of MGM (by the Supreme Court) We hold that one
who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe
copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps
taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of
infringement by third parties.
Grokster cases evidence: Grokster advertised an infringe use of its
service

ECS 3361-6
DRM Examples (for CDs)
Exploit difference between CD-ROM drives in
computers and CD players (Yellow Book vs. Red
Book)
Encode patterns into audio that translate into annoying
sounds when decoded
Secure Digital Music Initiative introduces a digital
watermarking scheme

ECS 3361-6
DRM Examples (for DVDs)
Content Scramble System (CSS):
An encryption scheme for DVD contents. Need decryption keys
to view a DVD.
Status: In use, but crack code exists

An Important Case:
Jon Johansen wrote a decryption program for Linux:
2600.com published the code
Motion picture studios sued 2600.com and won
Johansen tried in Norway and found not guilty

ECS 3361-6
Criticisms of DRM
DRM undermines fair use
Some DRM schemes track user information
DRM protections never expire (unlike copyrights)

Many people believe that any technological fix is

bound to fail. The alternative?

ECS 3361-6
US Copyright Laws
First copyright law was passed in 1790; provided 28
(14+14) years of protection for books.
Each subsequent revision broadened coverage scope
and increased protection period:

1831 Act prints and sheet music; 42 years

1909 Act photos, recordings, movies; 56 years
1976 Act software and databases; 75 years
1998 Act music broadcast over the Internet; authors lifetime +
95 years

ECS 3361-6
Copyright Law Revisions

Data taken from www.wikipedia.org

ECS 3361-6
Criticisms of Longer Protection
Constitutions stated purpose of copyright law:
[Article I, Section 8, Clause 8] Congress shall have the power:
to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by
securing for limited times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive
Right to their Respective Writings and Discoveries.

Longer Protection
Benefits only the few owners of franchises
1998 Act is called Mickey Mouse Protection Act
Will shift progress of science and arts offshore where copyrights
would have expired

ECS 3361-6
Harsher Punishments
No Electronic Theft (1997):
Any unauthorized copying with retail value >$1000

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998):

Many copyright violations become felonies

Digital Theft Deterrence and Copyright Damages

Improvement Act (1999):
Minimum $750 for each infringement
Up to 5 yrs in prison or $500K fine for first offense

ECS 3361-6
Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Passed in 1998, but is still controversial.
DMCA makes circumventing copy control a felony, even if it is
for fair use purpose.
Some Consequences:
While making a personal copy of music CD is fair use, it is illegal
to do so for movie DVDs
It is illegal to play a DVD on a GNU/Linux machine

OSP may be held liable (and face severe penalties) for

copyright violations by its users
Viacom v. YouTube lawsuit

ECS 3361-6
Software Protection
Utilitarian Arguments:

Copying software reduces software purchases

Leading to less income for software makers
Leading to lower production of new software
Leading to fewer benefits to society

Rights-Based Arguments:
Programming is hard work that only a few can perform well
Programmers should be rewarded for their labor and innovation
Programmers should to be able to own their programs

ECS 3361-6
Software Copyrights
Included in 1976 copyright law revision
What gets copyrighted?
Expression of idea, not idea itself
Object code, not source code (Companies treat source code as
a trade secret.)

Examples of violations:
Copying a program to give or sell to someone else
Preloading a program onto the hard disk of a computer being
sold
Distributing a program over the Internet

ECS 3361-6
Software Patents?
Software is patentable if it contains a mathematical
formula and implements it in a structure, which performs
a patentable function.
Patents are not to be given for things that are obvious or
are already in common use.
But it is hard to determine what is obvious.
Result: Some bad patents have been issued

ECS 3361-6
Software Patent Examples
Data compression schemes:
GIF, JPEG, MP3, RSA

Internet tools:
pay-per-click ad, plug-in browser

User interfaces:
progress-bar, force-feedback (in game controller)

ECS 3361-6
Criticisms of Software Patents
Cost is too high.
Traditional copyright has provided sufficient protection.
Most software patents cover trivial inventions or trivial
extensions of existing technologies.
Lack of patent application disclosure Patent
applications are published 18 months after they are
filed.

ECS 3361-6
Open-Source Software
Opposite answer to proprietary software.
No restrictions preventing others from selling or giving away
software
Source code included in distribution
No restrictions preventing others from modifying source code
No restrictions regarding how people can use software

Copyleft: (e.g. GPL)

Free to modify and redistribute as long as the same rights apply
to everyone receiving the software

ECS 3361-6
Creative Commons Licenses
In 2001, a group of professionals created the non-profit
corp. Creative Commons to provide copyright licenses
free of charge.
It allows the author to decide the extent of IP protection,
e.g.
Free copy, modify, and distribute, but no commercial use
Free copy and distribute, but no modification or commercial use

Many Wikipedia pictures are protected by CCL

ECS 3361-6
Open-Source
Benefits
Programs belong to entire community
Eliminates tension between obeying law and helping others
Gives everyone opportunity to improve program
New versions of programs appear more frequently
Shifts focus from manufacturing to service
Criticisms
Without an owner, incompatible versions may arise
Without critical mass of developers, quality can be poor
Relatively weak graphical user interface
Poor mechanism for stimulating innovation no companies will
spend billions on new programs

ECS 3361-6
Discussion Questions
A software service company A has a client C. C uses a software S
made by company B. Company A made a copy of S, not to resell,
but to provide service to C. Company B sued, and company A
argues that the copying was a fair use. Give arguments for each
side. Which side do you think should win?
Consider applying the fair-use guidelines to making a video of
oneself lip-synching to a popular song and posting the video on a
social-networking site. Do you think it is ethical to do this?
As the copying of digital texts, audio, and video grows cheaper, the
restrictions needed to enforce copyright grow more expensive and
invasive. Does copyright have a future in the digital age? Or are
new technologies steadily making it obsolete?

ECS 3361-6
You knew this was coming ...

Put everything away

No earphones, Headphones, i-phones, think-pads, books, etc.
Only need 1 piece of paper and a pen or pencil

ECS 3361-6
Quiz #2
Match the following letter to number that best fits
A) Kantianism

1) Framed in the language of rights

B) Act Utilitarianism

2) Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

C) Rule Utilitarianism

3) Cost-Benefits of building a highway

D) Ethical Egoism

4) Focus on the rightness of moral

rules

E) Social Contract Theory

5) Evaluating benefits of all actions that

follow a given law or guideline

Hand in Quiz 2 and optional HW (if you did it),

Make sure you NAME is on both, and

Take a 5 minute break

ECS 3361-6
And because this is really 2 classes put together into one long class ...

Quiz #3
The only ground on which intervention is justified is to prevent harm
to others; the individuals own good is not a sufficient condition.
1) This is known as _________________
2) Was Kant for or against censorship? Why?
3) What are the 2 types of censorship?
4) What is a Real-time Blackhole List?
5) What is the Kantian view of internet addiction?
(Yes, I know this is a hard one...)

ECS 3361-6
Class 6
HW 3
P. 213-214, Ch 4
#20
#23

ECS 3361-6
The Flaw in the Intel Pentium Chip* (1)
In late 1994, the media began to report that there was a
flaw in the new Pentium microprocessor produced by
Intel.
A flaw in the Pentium was especially significant, since at
that time it was the microprocessor used in 80% of the
personal computers produced worldwide.
Flaws in a complicated integrated circuit such as the
Pentium are not uncommon. Most of these flaws cannot
be detected by the user and do not affect the operation
of the computer.
*Fleddermann, C. B, Engineering Ethics

ECS 3361-6
The Flaw in the Intel Pentium Chip (2)
The flaw that was discovered in 1994 was different. It caused
incorrect answers when performing double-precision arithmetic, a
very common computer operation.
The flaw was easily detected by computer users. In fact, it first
came to light when a university researcher noticed that the results
of some calculations he was performing using his PC were
incorrect. This particular flaw was in the floating point unit (FPU)
and caused a wrong answer when double-precision arithmetic, a
very common operation, was performed.
Widely published test: Using spreadsheet software, the user was
able to take the number 4,195,835, multiply it by 3,145,727, and
then divide that result by 3,145,727.
With the flawed FPU, the result of the calculation was 4,195,579

ECS 3361-6
The Flaw in the Intel Pentium Chip (3)
Intels initial response was that to deny that there was a problem with the
chip.
When it became clear that this assertion was not accurate, Intel switched
its policy and stated that although there was indeed a defect in the chip,
the defect was insignificant and the vast majority of users would never
even notice it.
It should be noted that long before news of the flaw surfaced in the press,
Intel was aware of the problem and had already corrected it on subsequent
versions.
It did, however, continue to sell the flawed chip, and based on its early
insistence that the flaw did not present a significant problem to most
computer users, apparently planned to continue this practice until the new
version was available and the stocks of the flawed chip were exhausted.
IBM, a major Pentium user, canceled the sales of all IBM computers
containing the flawed chip.
Eventually, Intel agreed to replace the flawed microprocessor with an
unflawed version for any customer who asked to have it replaced.
Finally, Intel had a write-off of $475 million to solve this problem.

ECS 3361-6
The Flaw in the Intel Pentium Chip (4)
This incident can perhaps be viewed as simply a public relations
problem not involving any ethical issues; certainly this was a public
relations disaster for Intel. However, there are also some interesting
ethical issues that can be discussed. These include the following:
Should defects be revealed to consumers? Are there times when it is
ethical not to reveal defects? Is it an ethics problem only if safety is
involved?
Suppose a manufacturer places a warning in the literature that comes with
a product such as This product may contain unexpected flaws and might
not operate correctly under all conditions. Does this solve the ethical
problems for the company?
How can an engineer be sure that there are no defects in a product? If it is
impossible to eliminate all defects in a product, what level of defects is
acceptable? Does this depend on what the product is?
What do codes of ethics of professional engineering organizations such as
the IEEE say about selling products that are known to be defective?
What were the responsibilities of the engineers working on the Pentium
chip once they became aware of the flaw?

Discuss