Ethical Consideration of Reverse-Engineering

Ethical Consideration of Reverse-Engineering

Ethical considerations regarding reverse-engineering are hinged on the aspects of its legality, including the means of accessing the information and the intent of the reverse-engineering process. On the one hand, reverse engineering could be considered ethical if the intentions are to make the software interoperable, enhance learning, and fix the proprietary code when the source code is unavailable or lost (Perkins, 2019). On the other hand, reverse engineering could be unethical if the intention is to circumvent security protocols to gain unwarranted access to a specific system and decompile to copy and steal the source code (Perkins, 2019).

There are several options for a response if the competition is reverse-engineering a key capability protected by patents or trademarks in a firm. First, one could seek legal interventions on patent infringement and stop the competition from reverse-engineering the product. According to LaRoque (2017), patent protection, which lasts for a fixed duration, can be applied by firms to stop their competitors from reverse-engineering key capabilities protected by trademarks or patents. Second, one could use the protection of the trade secret law to respond to attempts by a competitor to reverse-engineer a key capability protected by patents or trademarks. The trade secret law prohibits competitors from using other firms’ methods, programs, or processes to derive economic value with the explicit authority of the intellectual property owner (LaRoque, 2017).

In my opinion, Google’s decision to move its servers to Hong Kong was aligned with its core values and mission. The company’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful (Google, 2022). The decision to move its servers to Hong Kong would reduce the tension between Google and the Chinese authorities, allowing its users in China uncensored access to online searches and information. According to Oreskovic (2010), the servers in Hong Kong enjoy uncensored access to the internet.

References

Google. (2022). About Google. Retrieved from Google: https://about.google/

LaRoque, S. J. (2017). Reverse Engineering and Trade Secrets in the Post-Alice World. Kansas Law Review, 427-457.

Oreskovic, A. (2010). Google moves China’s search service to Hong Kong. Retrieved from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-google-idUSTRE62L14V20100322

Perkins, D. (2019). Moral Perspectives of Reverse Engineering. Journal of Business, Technology & Leadership, 1-9.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Chipotle offers a good example for a discussion of barriers to imitation. Read the following article: “Inside Chipotle’s Kitchen: What’s Really Handmade?” (The Wall Street Journal, February 24, 2015). Note the stages starting with the identification of resources and capabilities, then VRIO analysis, and finally, barriers to imitation.

Ethical Consideration of Reverse-Engineering

It is legal to take apart publicly available products and services and try to replicate them and even develop workarounds for relevant patents. But is it ethical? If a key capability protected by patents or trademarks in your firm is being reverse-engineered by the competition, what are your options for a response? Also, how do you evaluate Google’s decision to move its servers to Hong Kong? For Google’s values, see Values.