Instagram and the Issue of Privacy: An Ethical Analysis

Instagram and the Issue of Privacy: An Ethical AnalysisGROUP 3

introductionInstagram - shortened combined word for Instant Telegram - invented by Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger on October 6, 2010, is a free application for photo sharing primarily for Apple users. April 3, 2012, gained them more than 50 million users, making way for the application to be the number photo sharing website there is to dateApril 9, 2012, Facebook bought Instagram for $1 billion.

After being bought by Facebook, Instagram updated its Terms and Conditionsa business or other entity may pay Instagram to display users photo and other details in connection with paid or sponsored content or promotions, without any compensation to you.

introductionThe change causes an uproar on its users, the event intensified when celebrities and photographers showed their disappointed over the newly updated terms and conditions for their photos are their businesses, therefore having Instagram use these photos for its own revenue is a threat to them. Instagram responded to those complains, January 2013 and it statedYou hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensable, worldwide license to use the Content that you postInstagram also reserves the right to share users information with companies affiliated with Instagram, third party service providers, third-party advertisers and other parties.

introductionDecember 2014, Instagram announced that it has acquired 300 million users, defeating Twitter which has a growing number of users of more than 250 million.

utilitarianism

utilitarianism

utilitarianismThe research concludes that the issue of Instagram and its issue on privacy, the societal cost is greater than that of its societal benefits. Therefore is morally unacceptable under the ethical principle of utilitarianism.

rightsThe ethics of rights states that an action is morally acceptable if it promotes,advances or respects human rights, otherwise if an action or a policy suppresses,tramples or disregards human rights, then it is morally unacceptable.

Rights of the user:Right to privacyThe right to privacy is a human right which may restrain both government and private party action that threatens the privacy of individuals. Instagrams change of the terms and conditon states that ..[users] hereby grant to Instagram a non-exclusive, fully paid, and royalty-free, transferable, sub-licensed , worldwide license to use the content that you post through the service.

rightsRight to be informedProduct information provided by a business should always be complete and truthful.Instagram was not honest because they chose to word the terms of service in a way that is confusing with the intention of withholding information and being deceitful. This violates the users right to information.

Rights of Instagram:Right to earn a livingThe right to earn a living and enjoy the fruits of ones labor is a fundamental right.Since Instagram is a free app, it is only fair that they somehow earn profit in other ways.

Rights

In conclusion, Instagrams change of its terms and conditions violated its users right to privacy and the right to be informed thus making it immoral.

Kantian approach"People should do what is right because it is right in order to be considered morally ethical. - Emmanuel Kant

"A company must not deceive or withhold information from its consumers.- Emmanuel Kant

Kantian approach1st Categorical Imperative"Act in such a way that your action can be considered as a universal law.Pictures are used against users "will".There's no universal law such as taking advantage.The New Privacy Policy of Instagram does not bear good will or right action

2nd Categorical Imperative"Do not treat a person as means but always an end.Instagram changed its term of privacy after they had gained over 100 million users.Instagram uses pictures as a tool to achieve their economic goals.

Kantian approachThough it was a free application, it doesn't mean that you can use the pictures as an advertisement or for other purposes without someone's consent. It contradicts the law of privacy.

Justice and fairnessDISTRIBUTED JUSTICETerms and ConditionsLegal WordingsLack of Understanding (Users)

RETRIBUTIVE JUSTICEEthicalUsers agreed to the terms and conditionsNo punishmentArtists filed a case on privacy issueThey cant so, they decided to deleted their accounts

Justice and fairnessCOMPENSATORY JUSTICEInstagram did notify the users about changing the Private PolicyBut they did not really change itThey cant pay damages because too many Instagram users

1 out of 3 is considered as ethical so the Instagram and the privacy issue is considered as immoral since it did not pass all the (3) patents of justice.

ETHICS OF CARECare ethics is developed based on the understanding of the individual as an interdependent, relational being and emphasized the importance of human relationships and emotion based virtues such as benevolence, mercy, care, friendship, reconciliation, and sensitivity Today the dominant ethical language comes from words like freedom, interests, rights, and justice.

Instagram have care for its users knowing that they own their content and Instagram does not claim any ownership rights over the photos that users share. Instagram have their respect, they said that they not have the intention to sell the photos.

VIRTUE ETHICSUnder virtue ethics, the ethical values that will be evaluated are:CourageHonestyJusticeTemperance

VIRTUE ETHICSThis research proves that Instagram failed to satisfy all these four virtues.Therefore is morally unacceptable under Virtue ethics.

LEGAL ASPECTSInstagram is a worldwide available application used by multiple users from multiple countries, on this part of the paper, the reporter will attempt to tackle the legal aspects made available from the sources. Republic Act No. 8293 or (Section 2) Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines 8293 or (Section 2) Intellectual Property Code of the PhilippinesSection 3: protects and recognizes the rights of every people that will produce something that is rightfully theirs especially when these creations will bring benefit to the people of the country Section 4: explains that shall a persecutor from any event in any country that the Philippines is also a partnered with, will have the right to be covered by this law shall he file complaints regarding the wrong treatment of his supposed intellectual property

Legal aspects Republic Act No. 10173 Data Privacy Act of 2012 Section 2: protects the privacy, the law suggest that privacy and communication come together to promote modernization

In the United States, Privacy Act of 1974 is created to control the information dissemination in order to protect the citizens private life. The law also give the people their rights to see the records about themselves.

CONCLUSIONWe reporters conclude differently on the aspect of Ethical analysis. Instagrams actions clearly do not follow the ethical theory of Kantianism. Instagram users photos were used in order for them to grain profit or achieve their economic goals, which is not the right thing to do according to Kants Categorical Imperative theories that states, Act in such a way that your action can be considered as a universal law and Do not treat a person as means but always an end. In utilitarianism, the analysis results to the case as a morally unacceptable act for producing the lowest benefits and greatest cost for both the company and the users concerning this area of analysis. The finding suggests proper approach of presenting new policies and law that should be thoroughly reviewed before publicizing to avoid misinterpretations.