Menu
support@nursinghomework.org
+1 714-215-3097

(Solved) : Word Limit 600 Words Total Parts C Hypothetical Scenario New York Software Company Nysc Li Q35537738

WORD LIMIT: no more than 600 words total for all parts a-c. Hypothetical Scenario: The New York Software Company (NYSC) has a

WORD LIMIT: no more than 600 words total for all parts a-c. Hypothetical Scenario: The New York Software Company (NYSC) has a line of software testing products, and NYSC pays Critical Time Inc (CTI) a service fee so that NYSC software products can use CTI’s remote calendar and scheduling services. NYSC has decided they are going to write their own remote calendar and scheduling components for their software, so they do not have to pay CTI service fees any more. An argument arises at an NYSC executive meeting. Chief technical officer Sally Forth insists they have to re-write all of the API calls in their existing software, they cannot simply re- implement CTI’s API. Sally says it is clear under current court rulings that CTI owns copyright in the APIs they are currently using. CEO Sam Antic tells her she is wrong; and that they should not go to the expense of re-writing all their code, because everyone says the Supreme Court will eventually rule against copyright for APIs. “Besides”, Sam argues, “CTI would have to find out what we’re doing and sue us. We have no obligation to tell them how we’re writing our code, or what API we are using.” (a) Using at least two relevant facts from the case history of Oracle v. Google, and applying a normative ethical theory, make an argument that Sally is right: NYSC must not use CTI APIs without permission. (b) Using at least two relevant facts from the case history of Oracle v. Google, and applying a normative ethical theory, make an argument that Sam is right: NYSC does not have to re-write their API calls regardless of permission from CTI. Show transcribed image text WORD LIMIT: no more than 600 words total for all parts a-c. Hypothetical Scenario: The New York Software Company (NYSC) has a line of software testing products, and NYSC pays Critical Time Inc (CTI) a service fee so that NYSC software products can use CTI’s remote calendar and scheduling services. NYSC has decided they are going to write their own remote calendar and scheduling components for their software, so they do not have to pay CTI service fees any more. An argument arises at an NYSC executive meeting. Chief technical officer Sally Forth insists they have to re-write all of the API calls in their existing software, they cannot simply re- implement CTI’s API. Sally says it is clear under current court rulings that CTI owns copyright in the APIs they are currently using. CEO Sam Antic tells her she is wrong; and that they should not go to the expense of re-writing all their code, because everyone says the Supreme Court will eventually rule against copyright for APIs. “Besides”, Sam argues, “CTI would have to find out what we’re doing and sue us. We have no obligation to tell them how we’re writing our code, or what API we are using.” (a) Using at least two relevant facts from the case history of Oracle v. Google, and applying a normative ethical theory, make an argument that Sally is right: NYSC must not use CTI APIs without permission. (b) Using at least two relevant facts from the case history of Oracle v. Google, and applying a normative ethical theory, make an argument that Sam is right: NYSC does not have to re-write their API calls regardless of permission from CTI.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *