Accolade vs Sega Essay Example for Free

Accolade vs Sega EssayAccolade would definitely be wrong in every aspect of this story. Accolades lawyers argument that Segas security codes were an interface standard is also wrong in a lockean based economy. This is because interface standards ar publicly owned by everybody and can be duplicated without permission. Nothing is publicly owned in a Locke based perspective. The utilitarian view would also favor Segas software code as existence private property, but for antithetic reasons.This view suggests if Sega didnt have property advanceds to its genesis and affiliated profit energy, indeed Sega would lose incentive to create sunrise(prenominal) ideas beneficial to the marketplace. This theory of avail also suggests Accolade and Sega should both(prenominal) have taken a different overture to how they did business, or lack of business, with each other. Sega should have given(p) accessibility to its gaming sympathize with for a small fee. This would have made Sega and Accolade more bankable to society because Accolades spicys would benefit Segas industry.The Marxist theory would take Accolades side to this story. This theory would suggest the software that Accolade decoded belongs to the general public for their benefit to make a profit. Sega owns only the game encourage and not the software that is used to run it. Accolades lawyers argument that the software is an interface standard would stand lawful. I personally agree with the utility theory most because if there wasnt any incentive for new ideas and technology, then there wouldnt be any. People and companies put a lot of effort and resources into new ideas.A person would not put any time and effort into a good idea, especially if they cannot make any silver from it. He or she could not make any money off of their idea because people would scantily steal their idea and profit from it themselves. If there were no copyrights or patents protecting ideas, we could all be reinforcement in an unindustrialized world. I believe Lockes theory of private property is most captivate for this case besides the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals final decision that agreed with Accolade.Sega was using the lockean approach to private property with its security software. Accolade duplicated their software code without permission and infringed on Segas copyright. The story, in the end, basically agreed to Segas argument. 2. I believe Accolade Stole Segas property because American law has held to the theory that individuals have a right to do what they want with their property, and government has no right to interfere with an individuals private property even for the good of society.Accolade wouldve benefited from using Segas product, but the law states it is Segas property, and they can do what they please with certain legal constraints. Sega did not appoint Accolade a license to market games on their property. If Sega did grant them a license, then it would not be stealing. If I di d not grant a person permission to use my car for their benefit and they drove off with it, I would call the police because someone stole my car. 3.I believe Accolade went similarly far in trying to reverse engineer Segas source code because Accolade already knew Sega didnt want them marketing games on their new gaming console. If Sega wanted Accolade games on their console platform, wouldnt Sega license them to do so? Sega specifically made that security code so game companies like Accolade would not benefit from Segas property. Sega wanted to be the sole maker of games for their console and they had the right to do that with their copyrighted property.With that said, I believe Accolade reverse engineered the software knowing it was morally wrong. I do not believe a company has the right to reverse engineer any product it wants. Taking an all ready thought of idea and creating a new product is different than copying another product verbatim. Reverse engineering affects the theor y of utility. The incentive to come up with new ideas would be lost because there would be no reward for it. Lets say Microsoft had the ability to create a new operating system and knew it could be reverse engineered the day they released it to the public.Would Microsoft put forwards the effort, time, and resources to make this new product? I know I wouldnt because Microsofts competitors could produce the same product with less(prenominal) overhead. This would be giving Microsofts competitors an advantage because they could sell the same product for less money. This would potentially put Microsoft out of business. Economies inevitably couldnt evolve to serve societies better. Works Cited Velasquez, Manuel G. Business moral philosophy Concepts and Cases. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson, 2012. Print.