Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Corruption and Bribery’

Corporate Ethos from the Top-Down

Uber CEO Travis Kalanick issued an apology and stepped down from his position as Chief Executive Officer after a video surfaced of him getting in an argument with his personal Uber driver and then shortly telling the man that some people don’t like to take individual responsibility.

This incident represented yet another stain on the company in a trail of sexual harrassment, discrimination, and pushing the envelope in legal and ethical boundaries. It also raises the question of how much the individual morality or personal ethics of a leader affects the corporate ethos or environment of the business culture. The ethos, or corporate climate, also winded up having an impact on the entire tech start-up industry itself, as evidenced by the avalanche of sexual harrassment revelations this week. Uber has also been found in violation of intellectual property laws and local/international driving regulations. My college mentor always mentioned that it’s naturally much easier to bring people down (e.g. from a chair) than to hoist them up. So it is with individual morality in an environment of corporate depravity.

 

Elysium: Immigration and the Ethics of Inequality

In the 22nd century, the privileged few live on a luxurious, disease-free, space habitat called Elysium (2013) while the masses reside within a planet Earth rampant with socioeconomic inequality.  At the same time, an alliance between big business (military-weapons supplier Armadyne)  and totalitarian government fosters exploitative workplace conditions.

Should everyone have access to the benefits/privileges of Elysium?  The film advances a populist ideal that everyone ought to have the freedom and right to live in Elysium (inside a world devoid of death, disease, or war, without borders nor boundaries). But is this position correct? Illegal immigration is obviously against the law but perhaps we need to look toward ethics to give us reasons why it is wrong. Making a distinction between universal human rights and the privileges/ responsibilities of citizenship (that belong with membership in particular groups, territories, and countries) might help, – e.g., consider the American right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness that goes along with the obligation to follow U.S. law.

LINtellectual Property Rights

While Jeremy Lin continues to weave a fast break around the world and generally inspire anyone who champions an underdog (particularly arousing Asian-Americans, Asian nationals, Ivy-Leaguers, and those of Christian faith), the NBA sensation has recently attempted to register a trademark for one of his monikers, “Linsanity.”

A trademark is typically a distinctive symbol or, in this case, phrase used by a legal entity to identify and distinguish itself. As a prospective owner of “Linsanity”, Jeremy may initiate legal proceedings to prevent its unauthorized use. However, it appears two California individuals have already also paid the $1,625 filing fee to use this phrase on apparel: An importer/exporter who “wanted to be a part of the excitement;” and a former volunteer basketball coach of Lin (see www.linsanity.com) who is currently selling “LINsanity” t-shirts featuring number 17 in the Knicks’ blue and orange colors.

Per complicated federal trademark laws, the first person to use a given mark like “Linsanity” has exclusive common-law rights in a given state, while a registered trademark offers legal protection nationwide. When deciding on a trademark application, the Trademark Office considers who first used the mark, whether the mark is unique or merely descriptive, and whether the mark creates confusion. Those three factors don’t appear to favor the apparently opportunistic “fan” who was “very proud of Jeremy.” Lin’s ex-coach also could run into a problem with California’s “right to publicity” law which protects celebrities’ names from commercial use without their permission not to mention Madison Square Garden and New York’s basketball brand.

Don’t try to explain it, dissect it. We’re just in the middle of it and enjoy it. Especially if you are a Knick fan… It’s a great American story. A great American story.

– Spike Lee, when asked about Linsanity on MSNBC

Yes! I have a raging case of Linsanity. I have been declared legally Linsane. My symptoms.. linsomnia, restless linsyndrome and lintestinal blockage!

– Stephen Colbert, The Colbert Report

Lin’s legal representative says that “We’re prepared to protect his intellectual property rights.” The U.S. Trademark and Patent Office reports it has not granted “Linsanity” to anyone yet pending a review of all who have applied. The application process starts with the examining attorney’s review and approval. The lawyer publishes the mark for 30 days and any parties who believe they may be harmed can file opposition. Gary Krugman, a partner at the Washington-based firm Sughrue Mion, said that he would tell Lin to file his own application and contest whichever of the others gets published, “I have a feeling both of these guys are small operators,” he said. “If Jeremy comes in with a big law firm they won’t be able to hang with him.”

While many people may look to capitalize financially on the phenomenon, there are additional legal, aesthetic and ethical implications in protecting Lin’s name. Copyright law looks disapprovingly on what amounts to identity theft. Surely, controlling the merchandise would reign in images fostering racial stereotypes and also restrict (cf. Linsanity Weed) Jeremy’s associations to products and services that he endorses.

Postscripts:

On Sunday, Lin led the Knicks to another improbable win over last year’s NBA Champion Dallas Mavericks (Vince “Vinsanity” Carter—who plays for the Mavericks—should check whether his own trademark rights have expired).

Speaking of common-law rights, the term “cognitive renaissance” shall be coined here in describing member(s) of marginalized groups establishing renewed concepts of self from unexpected sources (as opposed to reducing any tension arising from cognitive dissonance).

Honor and Redemption in Corporate Espionage

Contributing Author – Monday Morning Business Ethicist

Can Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) find honor and redemption as an industrial infiltrator? In the 11th chapter of a newly published book, Inception and Philosophy, I argue that he can . . . though only in his dreams.

Perhaps Dom has no choice in being a corporate spy and is not responsible for his actions. He may be considered honorable because of his professional expertise, or admirable devotion to family. I root for the “hero” too, but find Dom both unethically and recklessly irresponsible for violating principles of freedom.

Are we not all morally flawed and in need of redemption?

If you enjoy thinking about Inception, you’ll like this collection of 22 edited essays covering the various ethical, metaphysical, and religious themes of the film.  You can find Inception and Philosophy at Barnes and Noble, and sneak a peak at Amazon.com.

Does BP = Beyond the Pale?

The Center for Public Integrity reported that two refineries owned by BP accounted for “97 percent of all flagrant violations found in the refining industry by government safety inspectors over the past three years.” The Occupational Safety and Health Administration classified most of BP’s citations as “egregious willful” reflecting rule violations designed to prevent catastrophic refinery events.

Consider the 582-page application that BP submitted for its Deepwater Horizon well that never once discusses how to stop a blowout. Granted, the Minerals Management Service does not require a plan. Instead, amid lax regulation and/or a sloppy corporate cut and paste job, BP pledged that cold water mammals including sea otters, walruses, and sea lions would be protected in the Mexican Gulf. They also provided a Japanese home-shopping network Web address for its primary spill response provider. Not to be outdone, BP attempted to contain the public’s outrage by paying big bucks to fill top search items like “oil spill” with their own video material.

As a practical outlet for the philosophy of morality, ethics gives structure and boundaries. BP’s actions could be considered beyond the pale (unacceptable) for its loss of human life, underestimating the environmental impact, or social gaffes from its CEO. Some counter these unfortunate occurrences with the corporate behemoth as a victim of bad moral luck, regulators unable to keep up with complex rig technology, or managers pressured by the continued drive to hold down costs and make money for shareholders. Do these nuanced qualifications deserve further consideration before making final judgment or does BP’s systematic stench of unethical behavior run outside agreed standards of decency?