Accolade vs Sega Essay Example for Free

purity vs Sega EssayAccolade would definitely be wrong in every aspect of this story. Accolades lawyers subscriber line that Segas security codes were an larboard standard is also wrong in a lockean based economy. This is because interface standards are publicly owned by everybody and end be duplicated without permission. Nothing is publicly owned in a Locke based perspective. The utilitarian view would also favor Segas software code as being private property, but for different reasons.This view suggests if Sega didnt mother property rights to its genesis and affiliated profitability, then Sega would lose incentive to create saucy ideas beneficial to the marketplace. This theory of utility also suggests Accolade and Sega should both have taken a different approach to how they did business, or lack of business, with each other. Sega should have granted accessibility to its gaming console for a small fee. This would have made Sega and Accolade more profitable to society beca use Accolades games would utility 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 strike a profit. Sega owns only the game console and non 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 in that respect wasnt any incentive for new ideas and technology, then there wouldnt be any. People and companies tack a lot of grounds and resources into new ideas.A person would not put any time and effort into a good idea, especially if they sewernot make any money from it. He or she could not make any money off of their idea because populate would just steal their idea and profit from it themselves. If there were no copyrights or patents protecting ideas, we could all be living in an unindustrialized world. I desir e Lockes theory of private property is most appropriate for this case besides the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals final decision that agreed with Accolade.Sega was exploitation 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 retrieve 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 reaping, but the law states it is Segas property, and they can do what they please with certain legal constraints. Sega did not grant Accolade a license to market games on their property. If Sega did grant them a license, then it would not be stealing. If I did not grant a person permi ssion to use my car for their benefit and they drove off with it, I would call the law of nature because someone stole my car. 3.I believe Accolade went too 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 producer 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 theory of utility. The incen tive 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 forth the effort, time, and resources to make this new product? I know I wouldnt because Microsofts competitors could produce the same product with less overhead. This would be well-favoured 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. phone line Ethics Concepts and Cases. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson, 2012. Print.