Ethics Written Assignment 4

For my article on what I think the authors opinion would be, I chose The Right to Privacy from the December 15, 1890 Harvard Law Review.

The authors begin by telling us that our rights have evolved from physical items such as the right to secure property, to intangible items such as the right to enjoy life and the right to be left alone.

They use the example of the press invading people’s privacy by publishing photos and spreading gossip. The authors state that newspapers have the ability to publish information that can cause more stress and emotional harm to people than physical harm can.

The authors seem to have very strong feelings concerning the right to privacy and do not feel that the laws of their time adequately protected ones privacy. During their time the only technology that exists to breach ones privacy was photography and newspapers. In 1890 they could never have imagined a world filled with mass media outlets, the internet, YouTube, Instagram, cell phones and texting where stories and photos could be spread throughout the world in seconds. Given people’s perception of what privacy should be, they would be appalled at how modern society has willingly allowed their privacy to slip through their fingers.

On page 23 the authors state that “to determine in advance of experience the exact line at which the dignity and convenience of the individual must yield to the demands of the public welfare or of private justice would be a difficult task”. It is here that the authors start to make the point that judging when privacy must yield to the public good is not an easy judgement.  

The authors go on to give an example of a person with the lack of certain abilities. They state that if it is an average person then it is no one’s business but that if the person was running for public office, then voters have the right to know. They are making a judgement when it is justified to make public certain information. In my opinion they are applying the principal of diminishing the right to privacy in favor of the greater good and protection of the public.

 Near the bottom of page 24 the authors write, “Any rule of liability adopted must have in it an elasticity which shall take account of the varying circumstances of each case”. In my opinion, here the authors are stating that as much as the right to privacy is important, privacy laws need to be flexible depending on the situation.

On the top of page 25 the authors sate, “In general, then, the matters of which the publication should be repressed may be described as those which concern the private life, habits, acts, and relations of an individual, and have no legitimate connection with his fitness for a public office which he seeks or for which he is suggested, or for any public or quasi-public position which he seeks or for which he is suggested, and have no legitimate relation to or bearing upon any act done by him in a public or quasi- public capacity.” If I were arguing the case of what the authors would think in the case of Apple versus the FBI the above quote would be the last sentence in my closing argument. Here they are specifically stating that a person has the right to privacy so long as that privacy does not concern any act that he has committed that effects the public. After reading that section I have absolutely no doubt, and you must agree, that the authors would be fully in favor of Apple conforming to the court order to decrypt information found on the cell phone of those that perpetrated this most heinous crime against the people of San Bernardino. People of the time that the article was written had little tolerance for criminals. Especially criminals that are anti American and whose sole purpose in life it to harm citizens of the United States. The more I read on from page 24 of the article, the more I am convinced by their statements, that the authors would be in favor of doing what is best for the public good. Keep in mind that they still feel strongly about one’s right to privacy and are not in favor of making public one’s information that does not affect society in anyway.

On page 28 the authors state, “Still, the protection of society must come mainly through a recognition of the rights of the individual.” This reminds us that although they are concerned with the common good, the protection of society starts with the right to privacy.  

In A Message to Our Customers Tim Cook, CEO Apple Inc. goes on about the depth of private information people store on their phones. People store the same kind of information in other forms such as hard copy, on their computers and tablets? Our information is also stored in countless databases at banks, hospitals and financial institutions. If probable cause exists, the fourth amendment allows law enforcement to obtain a warrant to gain access to that information. I’m sure that the authors of Why Privacy is Important would agree based on their statements, that once your actions effect the public, that information should become public domain.

In FBI director James B. Comey makes personal, passionate plea on Apple-San Bernardino controversy

Director Comey stated “It is a big problem for law enforcement armed with a search warrant when you find a device that can’t be opened even though the judge said there’s probable cause to open it”.

This simple statement reflects that fact that an iPhone is just another device that is subject to existing laws of the land. In their time, the authors of The Right to Privacy would never have imagined iPhone encryption but they were quite familiar with diaries which they referred to six times in their article. From reading their article I am left with the impression that the diary of a mass murderer should be made available to law enforcement. Comey more directly addresses that this is a matter of balance between privacy and safety that will effect Americans for a long time. The Right to Privacy article did address it in a les direct manner but appears to favor the safety of the public good over the privacy of an individual.

References:

·         Why Privacy is Important, James Rachels, Philosophy & Public Affairs. Vol. 4, No. 4 (Summer, 1975), pp. 323-333

·         The Right to Privacy, Author(s): Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. Source: Harvard Law Review, Vol. 4, No. 5 (Dec. 15, 1890), pp. 193-220.

·         A Message to Our Customers Tim Cook, CEO Apple Inc. February 16, 2016

·         FBI director James B. Comey makes personal, passionate plea on Apple-San Bernardino controversy By Justin Wm. Moyer February 22, 2016

·         Apple’s  Encryption Battle with the FBI has Implications. The Guardian, Sam Thielman February 20, 2016

·         Fight for the Future Press Release, Holmes Wilson February 17, 2016