| Resolved Ethics Case #2 |
|
|
|
Each case brought before the IMC USA Ethics Committee provides insights into the difficulty of maintaining professional standards in a complex work environment. Each of us often makes decisions that, in another setting, might be reasonable and appropriate. However, in the context of the consulting relationship with a client or by our access to confidential information, this decision may well cross the line. The following case was based on such a decision brought before the Ethics Committee. Read it and see how you would have handled this situation. In what similar situations might you find yourself? How would you handle them?
See the IMC USA Code of Ethics for reference, or the IMC USE Code of Ethics Interpretive. When James Knight first opened his practice, he relied on former business associates and community networking for obtaining new business. While his business grew to a respectable size, Knight soon realized that, in order to expand, he would need to learn a great deal more about marketing than he had picked up in his previous manufacturing career. He made plans to attend several marketing seminars and to implement some of their strategies.
Frank Justin, the leader of one seminar series, suggested that Knight begin to collect marketing “pieces” that he received in the mail, viewed on websites or saw advertised in magazines. Knight understood Justin’s approach to be tweaking the piece using some different words while basically retaining the format of successful pieces. Justin suggested that one could tell what advertising was successful by how the ad was received in the mail or seen in magazines. Justin reasoned that people only keep spending money on things that pull in business well. He also mentioned that there is nothing new under the sun and suggested that originality may not always be a good investment of one’s time. Justin did stress, however.that pieces not be copied verbatim. One approach mentioned by Justin was rewording the headlines from old successful ads. However, Justin made it clear that he neither recommended nor condoned plagiarism.
Knight tried various marketing approaches he learned in Justin’s and other seminars and found several successful in increasing his business. As Knight invested in a website, began giving speeches around the country, filled web orders, wrote articles and position papers, he saw his business revenue jump. He occasionally used the handy cut and paste feature to save an Internet idea that appealed to him. Recalling his seminar days with Justin, Knight thought about how it was a waste of time to reinvent everything. Although he viewed himself as scrupulously honest, Knight began “borrowing” other peoples’ material and placing it on his website. While he knew that such verbatim use was plagiarism, he somehow rationalized that the same rules did not apply to the Internet as did to hard-copy written material.
Although Knight was experienced with patent-related intellectual property rights, his experience with written intellectual property was less extensive
Not knowing the proper way to give attribution, Knight followed practices he had seen in the literature. These included reprinting passages from others’ work. He thought it would be sufficient to rewrite something and note that it was based on the work of another. (He later found that while the law may not be uniformly clear on this point, most attorneys advise that it is best to ask for permission before quoting someone, even before using their name.)
As he became increasingly successful, Knight found that other people were appropriating his material. Once, when he learned that someone had copied passages from his website, he sent certified letters threatening all sorts of dire consequences if the party did not rectify the situation. When Knight discovered that another consultant had used phrases from Knight’s website, he immediately demanded that they be removed at once, or he would take legal action.
Knight began to use the registered copyright symbol on some of his phrases. He also used the trademark symbol, although he had not filed for any of these designations.
In all of these situations, there are ethical considerations. Some are clear and unambiguous and others less so. The following basics for handling written intellectual property may be helpful.
In view of the above, Knight is guilty of numerous legal and ethical violations. While he may plead ignorance in some cases and careless neglect in others, he rarely honestly faced up to his mistakes. the fact remains that he needs to educate himself on the ethical situations he has already encountered as well as those that are sure to surface in the future. Lack of knowledge of the law is no defense in most cases. Certainly, it is embarrassing to commit such breaches of ethical conduct. In addition, some of the breaches, like copying the work of others, are clearly a violation of the IMC Code of Ethics that any practising consultant should know and respect. While attorneys may maintain that there are many grey areas when it comes to legal culpability, it saves a lot of embarrassment, professional and client relationships, money, and stature to know and observe intellectual property basics and avoid even the perception of questionable conduct.
|
| < Prev |
|---|
