Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

ComputerandInformationEthics
FirstpublishedTueAug14,2001substantiverevisionMonOct26,2015
Inmostcountriesoftheworld,theinformationrevolutionhasalteredmanyaspectsoflife
significantly:commerce,employment,medicine,security,transportation,entertainment,andonand
on.Consequently,informationandcommunicationtechnology(ICT)hasaffectedinbothgoodways
andbadwayscommunitylife,familylife,humanrelationships,education,careers,freedom,and
democracy(tonamejustafewexamples).Computerandinformationethics,inthepresentessay,is
understoodasthatbranchofappliedethicswhichstudiesandanalyzessuchsocialandethicalimpacts
ofICT.
Themorespecifictermcomputerethicshasbeenused,inthepast,inseveraldifferentways.For
example,ithasbeenusedtorefertoapplicationsoftraditionalWesternethicstheorieslike
utilitarianism,Kantianism,orvirtueethics,toethicalcasesthatsignificantlyinvolvecomputersand
computernetworks.Computerethicsalsohasbeenusedtorefertoakindofprofessionalethicsin
whichcomputerprofessionalsapplycodesofethicsandstandardsofgoodpracticewithintheir
profession.Inaddition,namessuchascyberethicsandInternetethicshavebeenusedtoreferto
computerethicsissuesassociatedwiththeInternet.
Duringthepastseveraldecades,therobustandrapidlygrowingfieldofcomputerandinformation
ethicshasgenerateduniversitycourses,researchprofessorships,researchcenters,conferences,
workshops,professionalorganizations,curriculummaterials,booksandjournals.
1.FoundingComputerandInformationEthics
1.1Acyberneticviewofhumannature
1.2Wienersunderlyingmetaphysics
1.3Justiceandhumanflourishing
1.4Arefutationofethicalrelativism
1.5Methodologyininformationethics
2.DefiningComputerEthics
2.1Theuniquenessdebate
2.2Anagendasettingtextbook
2.3Aninfluentialcomputerethicstheory
2.4Computingandhumanvalues
2.5Professionalethicsandcomputerethics
3.Globalization
3.1Globallaws
3.2Globalcyberbusiness
3.3Globaleducation
3.4Informationrichandinformationpoor
4.AMetaphysicalFoundationforComputerEthics
5.ExponentialGrowth
Bibliography
AcademicTools
OtherInternetResources
PapersandBooks
JournalsandWebSites
RelatedEntries

1.FoundingComputerandInformationEthics
Inthemid1940s,innovativedevelopmentsinscienceandphilosophyledtothecreationofanew
branchofethicsthatwouldlaterbecalledcomputerethicsorinformationethics.Thefounderof
thisnewphilosophicalfieldwastheAmericanscholarNorbertWiener,aprofessorofmathematics
andengineeringatMIT.DuringtheSecondWorldWar,togetherwithcolleaguesinAmericaand
GreatBritain,Wienerhelpedtodevelopelectroniccomputersandothernewandpowerful
informationtechnologies.Whileengagedinthiswareffort,Wienerandcolleaguescreatedanew
branchofappliedsciencethatWienernamedcybernetics(fromtheGreekwordforthepilotofa
ship).EvenwhiletheWarwasraging,Wienerforesawenormoussocialandethicalimplicationsof
cyberneticscombinedwithelectroniccomputers.Hepredictedthat,aftertheWar,theworldwould
undergoasecondindustrialrevolutionanautomaticagewithenormouspotentialforgoodand
forevilthatwouldgenerateastaggeringnumberofnewethicalchallengesandopportunities.
WhentheWarended,WienerwrotethebookCybernetics(1948)inwhichhedescribedhisnew
branchofappliedscienceandidentifiedsomesocialandethicalimplicationsofelectroniccomputers.
TwoyearslaterhepublishedTheHumanUseofHumanBeings(1950),abookinwhichheexploreda
numberofethicalissuesthatcomputerandinformationtechnologywouldlikelygenerate.Theissues
thatheidentifiedinthosetwobooks,plushislaterbookGodandGolem,Inc.(1963),includedtopics
thatarestillimportanttoday:computersandsecurity,computersandunemployment,responsibilities
ofcomputerprofessionals,computersforpersonswithdisabilities,informationnetworksand
globalization,virtualcommunities,teleworking,mergingofhumanbodieswithmachines,robot
ethics,artificialintelligence,computersandreligion,andanumberofothersubjects.(SeeBynum
2000,2004,2005,2008a,2008b.)
Althoughhecoinedthenamecyberneticsforhisnewscience,Wienerapparentlydidnotsee
himselfasalsocreatinganewbranchofethics.Asaresult,hedidnotcoinanamelikecomputer
ethicsorinformationethics.Thesetermscameintousedecadeslater.(Seethediscussionbelow.)
Inspiteofthis,Wienersthreerelevantbooks(1948,1950,1963)dolaydownapowerfulfoundation,
anddouseaneffectivemethodology,fortodaysfieldofcomputerandinformationethics.His
thinking,however,wasfaraheadofotherscholarsand,atthetime,manypeopleconsideredhimto
beaneccentricscientistwhowasengaginginflightsoffantasyaboutethics.Apparently,noonenot
evenWienerhimselfrecognizedtheprofoundimportanceofhisethicsachievementsandnearly
twodecadeswouldpassbeforesomeofthesocialandethicalimpactsofinformationtechnology,
whichWienerhadpredictedinthelate1940s,wouldbecomeobvioustootherscholarsandtothe
generalpublic.
InTheHumanUseofHumanBeings,Wienerexploredsomelikelyeffectsofinformationtechnology
uponkeyhumanvalueslikelife,health,happiness,abilities,knowledge,freedom,security,and
opportunities.Themetaphysicalideasandanalyticalmethodsthatheemployedweresopowerfuland
widerangingthattheycouldbeusedeffectivelyforidentifying,analyzingandresolvingsocialand
ethicalproblemsassociatedwithallkindsofinformationtechnology,including,forexample,
computersandcomputernetworksradio,televisionandtelephonesnewsmediaandjournalismeven
booksandlibraries.BecauseofthebreadthofWienersconcernsandtheapplicabilityofhisideasand
methodstoeverykindofinformationtechnology,theterminformationethicsisanaptnameforthe
newfieldofethicsthathefounded.Asaresult,thetermcomputerethics,asitistypicallyused
today,namesonlyasubfieldofWienersmuchbroaderconcerns.
Inlayingdownafoundationforinformationethics,Wienerdevelopedacyberneticviewofhuman
natureandsociety,whichledhimtoanethicallysuggestiveaccountofthepurposeofahumanlife.
Baseduponthis,headoptedgreatprinciplesofjustice,whichhebelievedallsocietiesoughtto
follow.ThesepowerfulethicalconceptsenabledWienertoanalyzeinformationethicsissuesofall
kinds.

1.1Acyberneticviewofhumannature
Wienerscyberneticunderstandingofhumannaturestressedthephysicalstructureofthehumanbody
andtheremarkablepotentialforlearningandcreativitythathumanphysiologymakespossible.While
explaininghumanintellectualpotential,heregularlycomparedthehumanbodytothephysiologyof
lessintelligentcreatureslikeinsects:
Cyberneticstakestheviewthatthestructureofthemachineoroftheorganismisan
indexoftheperformancethatmaybeexpectedfromit.Thefactthatthemechanical
rigidityoftheinsectissuchastolimititsintelligencewhilethemechanicalfluidityofthe
humanbeingprovidesforhisalmostindefiniteintellectualexpansionishighlyrelevantto
thepointofviewofthisbook.mansadvantageovertherestofnatureisthathehas
thephysiologicalandhencetheintellectualequipmenttoadapthimselftoradicalchanges
inhisenvironment.Thehumanspeciesisstrongonlyinsofarasittakesadvantageofthe
innate,adaptive,learningfacultiesthatitsphysiologicalstructuremakespossible.
(Wiener1954,pp.5758,italicsintheoriginal)
Giventhephysiologyofhumanbeings,itispossibleforthemtotakeinawidediversityof
informationfromtheexternalworld,accessinformationaboutconditionsandeventswithintheirown
bodies,andprocessallthatinformationinwaysthatconstitutereasoning,calculating,wondering,
deliberating,decidingandmanyotherintellectualactivities.Wienerconcludedthatthepurposeofa
humanlifeistoflourishasthekindofinformationprocessingorganismsthathumansnaturallyare:
Iwishtoshowthatthehumanindividual,capableofvastlearningandstudy,whichmay
occupyalmosthalfofhislife,isphysicallyequipped,astheantisnot,forthiscapacity.
Varietyandpossibilityareinherentinthehumansensoriumandareindeedthekeyto
mansmostnobleflightsbecausevarietyandpossibilitybelongtotheverystructureof
thehumanorganism.(Wiener1954,pp.5152)

1.2Wienersunderlyingmetaphysics
Wienersaccountofhumannaturepresupposedametaphysicalviewoftheuniversethatconsidersthe
worldandalltheentitieswithinit,includinghumans,tobecombinationsofmatterenergyand
information.Everythingintheworldisamixtureofbothofthese,andthinking,accordingtoWiener,
isactuallyakindofinformationprocessing.Consequently,thebrain
doesnotsecretethoughtastheliverdoesbile,astheearliermaterialistsclaimed,nor
doesitputitoutintheformofenergy,asthemuscleputsoutitsactivity.Informationis
information,notmatterorenergy.Nomaterialismwhichdoesnotadmitthiscansurvive
atthepresentday.(Wiener1948,p.155)
AccordingtoWienersmetaphysicalview,everythingintheuniversecomesintoexistence,persists,
andthendisappearsbecauseofthecontinuousmixingandminglingofinformationandmatterenergy.
Livingorganisms,includinghumanbeings,areactuallypatternsofinformationthatpersistthroughan
ongoingexchangeofmatterenergy.Thus,hesaysofhumanbeings,
Wearebutwhirlpoolsinariverofeverflowingwater.Wearenotstuffthatabides,but
patternsthatperpetuatethemselves.(Wiener1954,p.96)

Theindividualityofthebodyisthatofaflameofaformratherthanofabitof
substance.(Wiener1954,p.102)

Usingthelanguageoftodaysinformationage(see,forexample,Lloyd2006andVedral2010)we
wouldsaythat,accordingtoWiener,humanbeingsareinformationobjectsandtheirintellectual
capacities,aswellastheirpersonalidentities,aredependentuponpersistingpatternsofinformation
andinformationprocessingwithinthebody,ratherthanonspecificbitsofmatterenergy.

1.3Justiceandhumanflourishing
AccordingtoWiener,forhumanbeingstoflourishtheymustbefreetoengageincreativeandflexible
actionsandtherebymaximizetheirfullpotentialasintelligent,decisionmakingbeingsinchargeof
theirownlives.Thisisthepurposeofahumanlife.Becausepeoplehavevariouslevelsandkindsof
talentandpossibility,however,onepersonsachievementswillbedifferentfromthoseofothers.Itis
possible,nevertheless,toleadagoodhumanlifetoflourishinanindefinitelylargenumberof
waysforexample,asadiplomat,scientist,teacher,nurse,doctor,soldier,housewife,midwife,
musician,tradesman,artisan,andsoon.
ThisunderstandingofthepurposeofahumanlifeledWienertoadoptwhathecalledgreat
principlesofjusticeuponwhichsocietyshouldbebuilt.Hebelievedthatadherencetothose
principlesbyasocietywouldmaximizeapersonsabilitytoflourishthroughvarietyandflexibilityof
humanaction.AlthoughWienerstatedhisgreatprinciples,hedidnotassignnamestothem.For
purposesofeasyreference,letuscallthemThePrincipleofFreedom,ThePrincipleofEquality
andThePrincipleofBenevolence.UsingWienersownwordsyieldsthefollowinglistofgreat
principles(1954,pp.105106):
ThePrincipleofFreedom
Justicerequiresthelibertyofeachhumanbeingtodevelopinhisfreedomthefullmeasureofthe
humanpossibilitiesembodiedinhim.
ThePrincipleofEquality
JusticerequirestheequalitybywhichwhatisjustforAandBremainsjustwhenthepositionsof
AandBareinterchanged.
ThePrincipleofBenevolence
Justicerequiresagoodwillbetweenmanandmanthatknowsnolimitsshortofthoseofhumanity
itself.
GivenWienerscyberneticaccountofhumannatureandsociety,itfollowsthatpeopleare
fundamentallysocialbeings,andthattheycanreachtheirfullpotentialonlywhentheyarepartofa
communityofsimilarbeings.Society,therefore,isessentialtoagoodhumanlife.Despoticsocieties,
however,actuallystiflehumanfreedomandindeedtheyviolateallthreeofthegreatprinciplesof
justice.Forthisreason,Wienerexplicitlyadoptedafourthprincipleofjusticetoassurethatthefirst
threewouldnotbeviolated.LetuscallthisadditionalprincipleThePrincipleofMinimum
InfringementofFreedom:
ThePrincipleofMinimumInfringementofFreedom
Whatcompulsiontheveryexistenceofthecommunityandthestatemaydemandmustbe
exercisedinsuchawayastoproducenounnecessaryinfringementoffreedom(1954,p.106).

1.4Arefutationofethicalrelativism
IfonegrantsWienersaccountofagoodsocietyandofhumannature,itfollowsthatawidediversity
ofcultureswithdifferentcustoms,languages,religions,valuesandpracticescouldprovidea
contextinwhichhumanscanflourish.Sometimesethicalrelativistsusetheexistenceofdifferent
culturesasproofthatthereisnotandcouldnotbeanunderlyingethicalfoundationforsocieties
allaroundtheglobe.Inresponsetosuchrelativism,Wienercouldarguethat,givenhisunderstanding

ofhumannatureandthepurposeofahumanlife,wecanembraceandwelcomearichvarietyof
culturesandpracticeswhilestilladvocatingadherencetothegreatprinciplesofjustice.Those
principlesofferacrossculturalfoundationforethics,eventhoughtheyleaveroomforimmense
culturaldiversity.TheonerestrictionthatWienerwouldrequireinanysocietyisthatitmustprovide
acontextwherehumanscanrealizetheirfullpotentialassophisticatedinformationprocessingagents,
makingdecisionsandchoices,andtherebytakingresponsibilityfortheirownlives.Wienerbelieved
thatthisispossibleonlywheresignificantfreedom,equalityandhumancompassionprevail.

1.5Methodologyininformationethics
BecauseWienerdidnotthinkofhimselfascreatinganewbranchofethics,hedidnotprovide
metaphilosophicalcommentsaboutwhathewasdoingwhileanalyzinganinformationethicsissueor
case.Instead,heplungeddirectlyintohisanalyses.Consequently,ifwewanttoknowaboutWieners
methodofanalysis,weneedtoobservewhathedoes,ratherthanlookforanymetaphilosophical
commentaryuponhisownprocedures.
WhenobservingWienerswayofanalyzinginformationethicsissuesandtryingtoresolvethem,we
findforexample,inTheHumanUseofHumanBeingsthathetriestoassimilatenewcasesby
applyingalreadyexisting,ethicallyacceptablelaws,rules,andpractices.Inanygivensociety,there
isanetworkofexistingpractices,laws,rulesandprinciplesthatgovernhumanbehaviorwithinthat
society.ThesepoliciestoborrowahelpfulwordfromMoor(1985)constituteareceivedpolicy
cluster(seeBynumandSchubert1997)andinareasonablyjustsociety,theycanserveasagood
startingpointfordevelopingananswertoanyinformationethicsquestion.Wienersmethodologyis
tocombinethereceivedpolicyclusterofonessocietywithWienersaccountofhumannature,plus
hisgreatprinciplesofjustice,pluscriticalskillsinclarifyingvagueorambiguouslanguage.Inthis
way,heachievedaveryeffectivemethodforanalyzinginformationethicsissues.Borrowingfrom
Moorslater,andveryapt,descriptionofcomputerethicsmethodology(Moor1985),wecandescribe
Wienersmethodologyasfollows:
1. Identifyanethicalquestionorcaseregardingtheintegrationofinformationtechnologyinto
society.Typicallythisfocusesupontechnologygeneratedpossibilitiesthatcouldaffect(orare
alreadyaffecting)life,health,security,happiness,freedom,knowledge,opportunities,orother
keyhumanvalues.
2. Clarifyanyambiguousorvagueideasorprinciplesthatmayapplytothecaseortheissuein
question.
3. Ifpossible,applyalreadyexisting,ethicallyacceptableprinciples,laws,rules,andpractices(the
receivedpolicycluster)thatgovernhumanbehaviorinthegivensociety.
4. Ifethicallyacceptableprecedents,traditionsandpoliciesareinsufficienttosettlethequestionor
dealwiththecase,usethepurposeofahumanlifeplusthegreatprinciplesofjusticetofinda
solutionthatfitsaswellaspossibleintotheethicaltraditionsofthegivensociety.
Inanessentiallyjustsocietythatis,inasocietywherethereceivedpolicyclusterisreasonably
justthismethodofanalyzingandresolvinginformationethicsissueswilllikelyresultinethically
goodsolutionsthatcanbeassimilatedintothesociety.
Notethatthiswayofdoinginformationethicsdoesnotrequiretheexpertiseofatrainedphilosopher
(althoughsuchexpertisemightprovetobehelpfulinmanysituations).Anyadultwhofunctions
successfullyinareasonablyjustsocietyislikelytobefamiliarwiththeexistingcustoms,practices,
rulesandlawsthatgovernapersonsbehaviorinthatsocietyandenableonetotellwhethera
proposedactionorpolicywouldbeacceptedasethical.Sothosewhomustcopewiththeintroduction
ofnewinformationtechnologywhethertheyarecomputerprofessionals,businesspeople,workers,
teachers,parents,publicpolicymakers,orotherscanandshouldengageininformationethicsby
helpingtointegratenewinformationtechnologyintosocietyinanethicallyacceptableway.
Informationethics,understoodinthisverybroadsense,istooimportanttobeleftonlytoinformation

professionalsortophilosophers.Wienersinformationethicsinterests,ideasandmethodswerevery
broad,coveringnotonlytopicsinthespecificfieldofcomputerethics,aswewouldcallittoday,
butalsoissuesinrelatedareasthat,today,arecalledagentethics(see,forexample,Floridi2013b),
Internetethics(Cavalier2005),andnanotechnologyethics(Weckert2002).Thepurviewof
Wienersideasandmethodsisevenbroadenoughtoencompasssubfieldslikejournalismethics,
libraryethics,andtheethicsofbioengineering.
Eveninthelate1940s,Wienermadeitclearthat,onhisview,theintegrationintosocietyofthenewly
inventedcomputingandinformationtechnologywouldleadtotheremakingofsocietytothe
secondindustrialrevolutiontheautomaticage.Itwouldaffecteverywalkoflife,andwouldbea
multifaceted,ongoingprocessrequiringdecadesofeffort.InWienersownwords,thenew
informationtechnologyhadplacedhumanbeingsinthepresenceofanothersocialpotentialityof
unheardofimportanceforgoodandforevil.(1948,p.27)However,becausehedidnotthinkof
himselfascreatinganewbranchofethics,Wienerdidnotcoinnames,suchascomputerethicsor
informationethics,todescribewhathewasdoing.Thesetermsbeginningwithcomputerethics
cameintocommonuseyearslater,startinginthemid1970swiththeworkofWalterManer.(see
Maner1980)
Today,theinformationagethatWienerpredictedmorethanhalfacenturyagohascomeinto
existenceandthemetaphysicalandscientificfoundationforinformationethicsthathelaiddown
continuestoprovideinsightandeffectiveguidanceforunderstandingandresolvingethicalchallenges
engenderedbyinformationtechnologiesofallkinds.

2.DefiningComputerEthics
In1976,nearlythreedecadesafterthepublicationofWienersbookCybernetics,WalterManer
noticedthattheethicalquestionsandproblemsconsideredinhisMedicalEthicscourseatOld
DominionUniversityoftenbecamemorecomplicatedorsignificantlyalteredwhencomputersgot
involved.Sometimestheadditionofcomputers,itseemedtoManer,actuallygeneratedwhollynew
ethicsproblemsthatwouldnothaveexistedifcomputershadnotbeeninvented.Heconcludedthat
thereshouldbeanewbranchofappliedethicssimilartoalreadyexistingfieldslikemedicalethics
andbusinessethics.Afterconsideringthenameinformationethics,hedecidedinsteadtocallthe
proposednewfieldcomputerethics.[1](Atthattime,Manerdidnotknowaboutthecomputerethics
worksofNorbertWiener.)Hedefinedtheproposednewfieldasonethatstudiesethicalproblems
aggravated,transformedorcreatedbycomputertechnology.Hedevelopedanexperimental
computerethicscoursedesignedprimarilyforstudentsinuniversitylevelcomputerscienceprograms.
Hiscoursewasasuccess,andstudentsathisuniversitywantedhimtoteachitregularly.Hecomplied
withtheirwishesandalsocreated,in1978,astarterkitonteachingcomputerethics,whichhe
preparedfordisseminationtoattendeesofworkshopsthatheranandspeechesthathegaveat
philosophyconferencesandcomputingscienceconferencesinAmerica.In1980,HelvetiaPressand
theNationalInformationandResourceCenteronTeachingPhilosophypublishedManerscomputer
ethicsstarterkitasamonograph(Maner1980).Itcontainedcurriculummaterialsandpedagogical
adviceforuniversityteachers.Italsoincludedarationaleforofferingsuchacourseinauniversity,
suggestedcoursedescriptionsforuniversitycatalogs,alistofcourseobjectives,teachingtips,and
discussionsoftopicslikeprivacyandconfidentiality,computercrime,computerdecisions,
technologicaldependenceandprofessionalcodesofethics.Duringtheearly1980s,ManersStarter
KitwaswidelydisseminatedbyHelvetiaPresstocollegesanduniversitiesinAmericaandelsewhere.
MeanwhileManercontinuedtoconductworkshopsandteachcoursesincomputerethics.Asaresult,
anumberofscholars,especiallyphilosophersandcomputerscientists,wereintroducedtocomputer
ethicsbecauseofManerstrailblazingefforts.

2.1Theuniquenessdebate

WhileManerwasdevelopinghisnewcomputerethicscourseinthemidtolate1970s,acolleagueof
hisinthePhilosophyDepartmentatOldDominionUniversity,DeborahJohnson,becameinterested
inhisproposednewfield.ShewasespeciallyinterestedinManersviewthatcomputersgenerate
whollynewethicalproblems,forshedidnotbelievethatthiswastrue.Asaresult,ManerandJohnson
begandiscussingethicscasesthatallegedlyinvolvednewproblemsbroughtaboutbycomputers.In
thesediscussions,Johnsongrantedthatcomputersdidindeedtransformoldethicsproblemsin
interestingandimportantwaysthatis,givethemanewtwistbutshedidnotagreethat
computersgeneratedethicallyuniqueproblemsthathadneverbeenseenbefore.TheresultingManer
Johnsondiscussioninitiatedafruitfulseriesofcommentsandpublicationsonthenatureand
uniquenessofcomputerethicsaseriesofscholarlyexchangesthatstartedwithManerandJohnson
andlaterspreadtootherscholars.Thefollowingpassage,fromManersETHICOMP95keynote
address,drewanumberofotherpeopleintothediscussion:
Ihavetriedtoshowthatthereareissuesandproblemsthatareuniquetocomputerethics.
Foralloftheseissues,therewasanessentialinvolvementofcomputingtechnology.
Exceptforthistechnology,theseissueswouldnothavearisen,orwouldnothavearisen
intheirhighlyalteredform.Thefailuretofindsatisfactorynoncomputeranalogies
testifiestotheuniquenessoftheseissues.Thelackofanadequateanalogy,inturn,has
interestingmoralconsequences.Normally,whenweconfrontunfamiliarethical
problems,weuseanalogiestobuildconceptualbridgestosimilarsituationswehave
encounteredinthepast.Thenwetrytotransfermoralintuitionsacrossthebridge,from
theanalogcasetoourcurrentsituation.Lackofaneffectiveanalogyforcesustodiscover
newmoralvalues,formulatenewmoralprinciples,developnewpolicies,andfindnew
waystothinkabouttheissuespresentedtous.(Maner1996,p.152)
Overthedecadethatfollowedthepublicationofthisprovocativepassage,theextendeduniqueness
debateledtoanumberofusefulcontributionstocomputerandinformationethics.(Forsome
examplepublications,seeJohnson1985,1994,1999,2001Maner1980,1996,1999Gorniak
Kocikowska1996Tavani2002,2005Himma2003FloridiandSanders2004Mather2005and
Bynum2006,2007.)

2.2Anagendasettingtextbook
Bytheearly1980s,JohnsonhadjoinedthestaffofRensselaerPolytechnicInstituteandhadsecureda
granttoprepareasetofteachingmaterialspedagogicalmodulesconcerningcomputerethicsthat
turnedouttobeverysuccessful.Sheincorporatedthemintoatextbook,ComputerEthics,whichwas
publishedin1985(Johnson1985).Onpage1,shenotedthatcomputersposenewversionsof
standardmoralproblemsandmoraldilemmas,exacerbatingtheoldproblems,andforcingustoapply
ordinarymoralnormsinunchartedrealms.ShedidnotgrantManersclaim,however,that
computerscreatewhollynewethicalproblems.Instead,shedescribedcomputerethicsissuesasold
ethicalproblemsthataregivenanewtwistbycomputertechnology.
JohnsonsbookComputerEthicswasthefirstmajortextbookinthefield,anditquicklybecamethe
primarytextusedincomputerethicscoursesofferedatuniversitiesinEnglishspeakingcountries.For
morethanadecade,hertextbooksetthecomputerethicsresearchagendaontopics,suchas
ownershipofsoftwareandintellectualproperty,computingandprivacy,responsibilitiesofcomputer
professionals,andfairdistributionoftechnologyandhumanpower.Inlatereditions(1994,2001,
2009),Johnsonaddednewethicaltopicslikehackingintopeoplescomputerswithouttheir
permission,computertechnologyforpersonswithdisabilities,andethicsontheInternet.
AlsoinlatereditionsofComputerEthics,Johnsoncontinuedtheuniquenessdebatediscussion,
notingforexamplethatnewinformationtechnologiesprovidenewwaystoinstrumenthuman
actions.Becauseofthis,sheagreedwithManerthatnewspecificethicsquestionshadbeengenerated
bycomputertechnologyforexample,Shouldownershipofsoftwarebeprotectedbylaw?orDo

hugedatabasesofpersonalinformationthreatenprivacy?butshearguedthatsuchquestionsare
merelynewspeciesofoldmoralissues,suchasprotectionofhumanprivacyorownershipof
intellectualproperty.Theyarenot,sheinsisted,whollynewethicsproblemsrequiringadditionsto
traditionalethicaltheories,asManerhadclaimed(Maner1996).

2.3Aninfluentialcomputerethicstheory
Theyear1985wasawatershedyearinthehistoryofcomputerethics,notonlybecauseofthe
appearanceofJohnsonsagendasettingtextbook,butalsobecauseJamesMoorsclassicpaper,
WhatIsComputerEthics?waspublishedinaspecialcomputerethicsissueofthejournal
Metaphilosophy.ThereMoorprovidedanaccountofthenatureofcomputerethicsthatwasbroader
andmoreambitiousthanthedefinitionsofManerorJohnson.Hewentbeyonddescriptionsand
examplesofcomputerethicsproblemsbyofferinganexplanationofwhycomputingtechnologyraises
somanyethicalquestionscomparedtootherkindsoftechnology.Moorsexplanationofthe
revolutionarypowerofcomputertechnologywasthatcomputersarelogicallymalleable:
Computersarelogicallymalleableinthattheycanbeshapedandmoldedtodoany
activitythatcanbecharacterizedintermsofinputs,outputsandconnectinglogical
operations.Becauselogicapplieseverywhere,thepotentialapplicationsofcomputer
technologyappearlimitless.Thecomputeristhenearestthingwehavetoauniversal
tool.Indeed,thelimitsofcomputersarelargelythelimitsofourowncreativity.(Moor,
1985,269)
Thelogicalmalleabilityofcomputertechnology,saidMoor,makesitpossibleforpeopletodoavast
numberofthingsthattheywerenotabletodobefore.Sincenoonecoulddothembefore,the
questionmayneverhavearisenastowhetheroneoughttodothem.Inaddition,becausetheycould
notbedonebefore,perhapsnolawsorstandardsofgoodpracticeorspecificethicalruleshadever
beenestablishedtogovernthem.Moorcalledsuchsituationspolicyvacuums,andsomeofthose
vacuumsmightgenerateconceptualmuddles:
Atypicalproblemincomputerethicsarisesbecausethereisapolicyvacuumabouthow
computertechnologyshouldbeused.Computersprovideuswithnewcapabilitiesand
theseinturngiveusnewchoicesforaction.Often,eithernopoliciesforconductinthese
situationsexistorexistingpoliciesseeminadequate.Acentraltaskofcomputerethicsis
todeterminewhatweshoulddoinsuchcases,thatis,formulatepoliciestoguideour
actions.Onedifficultyisthatalongwithapolicyvacuumthereisoftenaconceptual
vacuum.Althoughaproblemincomputerethicsmayseemclearinitially,alittle
reflectionrevealsaconceptualmuddle.Whatisneededinsuchcasesisananalysisthat
providesacoherentconceptualframeworkwithinwhichtoformulateapolicyforaction.
(Moor,1985,266)
Inthelate1980s,Moorspolicyvacuumexplanationoftheneedforcomputerethicsandhis
accountoftherevolutionarylogicalmalleabilityofcomputertechnologyquicklybecamevery
influentialamongagrowingnumberofcomputerethicsscholars.Headdedadditionalideasinthe
1990s,includingtheimportantnotionofcorehumanvalues:AccordingtoMoor,somehumanvalues
suchaslife,health,happiness,security,resources,opportunities,andknowledgearesoimportant
tothecontinuedsurvivalofanycommunitythatessentiallyallcommunitiesdovaluethem.Indeed,if
acommunitydidnotvaluethecorevalues,itsoonwouldceasetoexist.Moorusedcorevaluesto
examinecomputerethicstopicslikeprivacyandsecurity(Moor1997),andtoaddanaccountof
justice,whichhecalledjustconsequentialism(Moor,1999),atheorythatcombinescorevalues
andconsequentialismwithBernardGertsdeontologicalnotionofmoralimpartialityusingthe
blindfoldofjustice(Gert,1998).
Moorsapproachtocomputerethicsisapracticaltheorythatprovidesabroadperspectiveonthe

natureoftheinformationrevolution.Byusingthenotionsoflogicalmalleability,policy
vacuums,conceptualmuddles,corevaluesandjustconsequentialism,heprovidesthe
followingproblemsolvingmethod:
1. Identifyapolicyvacuumgeneratedbycomputingtechnology.
2. Eliminateanyconceptualmuddles.
3. Usethecorevaluesandtheethicalresourcesofjustconsequentialismtoreviseexistingbut
inadequatepolicies,orelsetocreatenewpoliciesthatjustlyeliminatethevacuumandresolve
theoriginalethicalissue.
Thethirdstepisaccomplishedbycombiningdeontologyandconsequentialismwhichtraditionally
havebeenconsideredincompatiblerivalethicstheoriestoachievethefollowingpracticalresults:
Iftheblindfoldofjusticeisappliedto[suggested]computingpolicies,somepolicieswill
beregardedasunjustbyallrational,impartialpeople,somepolicieswillberegardedas
justbyallrational,impartialpeople,andsomewillbeindispute.Thisapproachisgood
enoughtoprovidejustconstraintsonconsequentialism.Wefirstrequirethatall
computingpoliciespasstheimpartialitytest.Clearly,ourcomputingpoliciesshouldnot
beamongthosethateveryrational,impartialpersonwouldregardasunjust.Thenwecan
furtherselectpoliciesbylookingattheirbeneficialconsequences.Wearenotethically
requiredtoselectpolicieswiththebestpossibleoutcomes,butwecanassessthemeritsof
thevariouspoliciesusingconsequentialistconsiderationsandwemayselectverygood
onesfromthosethatarejust.(Moor,1999,68)

2.4Computingandhumanvalues
BeginningwiththecomputerethicsworksofNorbertWiener(1948,1950,1963),acommonthread
hasrunthroughmuchofthehistoryofcomputerethicsnamely,concernforprotectingand
advancingcentralhumanvalues,suchalife,health,security,happiness,freedom,knowledge,
resources,powerandopportunity.Thus,mostofthespecificissuesthatWienerdealtwitharecases
ofdefendingoradvancingsuchvalues.Forexample,byworkingtopreventmassiveunemployment
causedbyroboticfactories,Wienertriedtopreservesecurity,resourcesandopportunitiesforfactory
workers.Similarly,byarguingagainsttheuseofdecisionmakingwargamemachines,Wienertried
todiminishthreatstosecurityandpeace.
Thishumanvaluesapproachtocomputerethicshasbeenveryfruitful.Ithasserved,forexample,
asanorganizingthemeformajorcomputerethicsconferences,suchasthe1991NationalConference
onComputingandValuesatSouthernConnecticutStateUniversity(seethesectionbelowon
exponentialgrowth),whichwasdevotedtotheimpactsofcomputinguponsecurity,property,
privacy,knowledge,freedomandopportunities.Inthelate1990s,asimilarapproachtocomputer
ethics,calledvaluesensitivecomputerdesign,emergedbasedupontheinsightthatpotential
computerethicsproblemscanbeavoided,whilenewtechnologyisunderdevelopment,by
anticipatingpossibleharmtohumanvaluesanddesigningnewtechnologyfromtheverybeginningin
waysthatpreventsuchharm.(See,forexample,Brey,2001,2012Friedman,1997Friedmanand
Nissenbaum,1996Introna,2005aIntronaandNissenbaum,2000Flanagan,etal.,2008.)

2.5Professionalethicsandcomputerethics
Intheearly1990s,adifferentemphasiswithincomputerethicswasadvocatedbyDonaldGotterbarn.
Hebelievedthatcomputerethicsshouldbeseenasaprofessionalethicsdevotedtothedevelopment
andadvancementofstandardsofgoodpracticeandcodesofconductforcomputingprofessionals.
Thus,in1991,inthearticleComputerEthics:ResponsibilityRegained,Gotterbarnsaid:
Thereislittleattentionpaidtothedomainofprofessionalethicsthevaluesthatguide

thedaytodayactivitiesofcomputingprofessionalsintheirroleasprofessionals.By
computingprofessionalImeananyoneinvolvedinthedesignanddevelopmentof
computerartifacts.Theethicaldecisionsmadeduringthedevelopmentofthese
artifactshaveadirectrelationshiptomanyoftheissuesdiscussedunderthebroader
conceptofcomputerethics.(Gotterbarn,1991)
Throughoutthe1990s,withthisaspectofcomputerethicsinmind,Gotterbarnworkedwithother
professionalethicsadvocates(forexample,KeithMiller,DianneMartin,ChuckHuffandSimon
Rogerson)inavarietyofprojectstoadvanceprofessionalresponsibilityamongcomputer
practitioners.Evenbefore1991,GotterbarnhadbeenpartofacommitteeoftheACM(Association
forComputingMachinery)tocreatethethirdversionofthatorganizationsCodeofEthicsand
ProfessionalConduct(adoptedbytheACMin1992,seeAnderson,etal.,1993).Later,Gotterbarn
andcolleaguesintheACMandtheComputerSocietyoftheIEEE(InstituteofElectricaland
ElectronicEngineers)developedlicensingstandardsforsoftwareengineers.Inaddition,Gotterbarn
headedajointtaskforceoftheIEEEandACMtocreatetheSoftwareEngineeringCodeofEthics
andProfessionalPractice(adoptedbythoseorganizationsin1999seeGotterbarn,Millerand
Rogerson,1997).
Inthelate1990s,GotterbarncreatedtheSoftwareEngineeringEthicsResearchInstitute(SEERI)at
EastTennesseeStateUniversity(seehttp://seeri.etsu.edu/)andintheearly2000s,togetherwith
SimonRogerson,hedevelopedacomputerprogramcalledSoDIS(SoftwareDevelopmentImpact
Statements)toassistindividuals,companiesandorganizationsinthepreparationofethical
stakeholderanalysesfordetermininglikelyethicalimpactsofsoftwaredevelopmentprojects
(GotterbarnandRogerson,2005).Theseandmanyotherprojectsfocusedattentionuponprofessional
responsibilityandadvancedtheprofessionalizationandethicalmaturationofcomputingpractitioners.
(SeethebibliographybelowforworksbyR.Anderson,D.Gotterbarn,C.Huff,C.D.Martin,K.
Miller,andS.Rogerson.)

3.Globalization
In1995,inherETHICOMP95presentationTheComputerRevolutionandtheProblemofGlobal
Ethics,KrystynaGrniakKocikowska,madeastartlingprediction(seeGrniak,1996).Sheargued
thatcomputerethicseventuallywillevolveintoaglobalethicapplicableineverycultureonearth.
AccordingtothisGrniakhypothesis,regionalethicaltheorieslikeEuropesBenthamiteand
Kantiansystems,aswellasthediverseethicalsystemsembeddedinotherculturesoftheworld,all
derivefromlocalhistoriesandcustomsandareunlikelytobeapplicableworldwide.Computerand
informationethics,ontheotherhand,Grniakargued,hasthepotentialtoprovideaglobalethic
suitablefortheInformationAge:
anewethicaltheoryislikelytoemergefromcomputerethicsinresponsetothecomputer
revolution.Thenewlyemergingfieldofinformationethics,therefore,ismuchmoreimportant
thanevenitsfoundersandadvocatesbelieve.(p.177)
TheverynatureoftheComputerRevolutionindicatesthattheethicofthefuturewillhavea
globalcharacter.Itwillbeglobalinaspatialsense,sinceitwillencompasstheentireglobe.It
willalsobeglobalinthesensethatitwilladdressthetotalityofhumanactionsandrelations.
(p.179)
Computersdonotknowborders.Computernetworkshaveatrulyglobalcharacter.Hence,
whenwearetalkingaboutcomputerethics,wearetalkingabouttheemergingglobalethic.(p.
186)
therulesofcomputerethics,nomatterhowwellthoughtthrough,willbeineffectiveunless
respectedbythevastmajorityoformaybeevenallcomputerusers.Inotherwords,
computerethicswillbecomeuniversal,itwillbeaglobalethic.(p.187)
TheprovocativeGrniakhypothesiswasasignificantcontributiontotheongoinguniqueness

debate,anditreinforcedManersclaimwhichhemadeatthesameETHICOMP95conferencein
hiskeynoteaddressthatinformationtechnologyforcesustodiscovernewmoralvalues,formulate
newmoralprinciples,developnewpolicies,andfindnewwaystothinkabouttheissuespresentedto
us.(Maner1996,p.152)Grniakdidnotspeculateaboutthegloballyrelevantconceptsand
principlesthatwouldevolvefrominformationethics.Shemerelypredictedthatsuchatheorywould
emergeovertimebecauseoftheglobalnatureoftheInternetandtheresultingethicsconversation
amongalltheculturesoftheworld.
Grniakmaywellberight.Computerethicstodayappearstobeevolvingintoabroaderandeven
moreimportantfield,whichmightreasonablybecalledglobalinformationethics.Globalnetworks,
especiallytheInternet,areconnectingpeopleallovertheearth.Forthefirsttimeinhistory,effortsto
developmutuallyagreedstandardsofconduct,andeffortstoadvanceanddefendhumanvalues,are
beingmadeinatrulyglobalcontext.So,forthefirsttimeinthehistoryoftheearth,ethicsandvalues
willbedebatedandtransformedinacontextthatisnotlimitedtoaparticulargeographicregion,or
constrainedbyaspecificreligionorculture.Thiscouldbeoneofthemostimportantsocial
developmentsinhistory(Bynum2006Floridi2014).Considerjustafewoftheglobalissues:

3.1Globallaws
IfcomputerusersintheUnitedStates,forexample,wishtoprotecttheirfreedomofspeechonthe
Internet,whoselawsapply?TwohundredormorecountriesareinterconnectedbytheInternet,sothe
UnitedStatesConstitution(withitsFirstAmendmentprotectionoffreedomofspeech)isjustalocal
lawontheInternetitdoesnotapplytotherestoftheworld.Howcanissueslikefreedomof
speech,controlofpornography,protectionofintellectualproperty,invasionsofprivacy,andmany
otherstobegovernedbylawwhensomanycountriesareinvolved?(Lessig2004)Ifacitizenina
Europeancountry,forexample,hasInternetdealingswithsomeoneinafarawayland,andthe
governmentofthatcountryconsidersthosedealingstobeillegal,cantheEuropeanbetriedbycourts
inthefarawaycountry?

3.2Globalcyberbusiness
Inrecentyears,therehasbearapidexpansionofglobalcyberbusiness.Nationswithappropriate
technologicalinfrastructurealreadyinplacehaveenjoyedresultingeconomicbenefits,whiletherest
oftheworldhaslaggedbehind.Whatwillbethepoliticalandeconomicfalloutfromthisinequality?
Inaddition,willacceptedbusinesspracticesinonepartoftheworldbeperceivedascheatingor
fraudinotherpartsoftheworld?Willafewwealthynationswidenthealreadybiggapbetweenthe
richandthepoor?Willpoliticalandevenmilitaryconfrontationsemerge?

3.3Globaleducation
Ifinexpensiveaccesstoaglobalinformationnetisprovidedtorichandpooraliketopoverty
strickenpeopleinghettos,topoornationsintheunderdevelopedworld,etc.forthefirsttimein
history,nearlyeveryoneonearthwillhaveaccesstodailynewsfromafreepresstotexts,documents
andartworksfromgreatlibrariesandmuseumsoftheworldtopolitical,religiousandsocial
practicesofpeopleseverywhere.Whatwillbetheimpactofthissuddenandprofoundglobal
educationuponpoliticaldictatorships,isolatedcommunities,coherentcultures,religiouspractices,
etc.?AsgreatuniversitiesoftheworldbegintoofferdegreesandknowledgemodulesviatheInternet,
willlesseruniversitiesbedamagedorevenforcedoutofbusiness?

3.4Informationrichandinformationpoor
Thegapbetweenrichandpoornations,andevenbetweenrichandpoorcitizensinindustrialized
countries,isalreadydisturbinglywide.Aseducationalopportunities,businessandemployment

opportunities,medicalservicesandmanyothernecessitiesoflifemovemoreandmoreinto
cyberspace,willgapsbetweentherichandthepoorbecomeevenworse?

4.AMetaphysicalFoundationforComputerEthics
Importantrecentdevelopments,whichbeganafter1995,appeartobeconfirmingGrniaks
hypothesisinparticular,themetaphysicalinformationethicstheoryofLucianoFloridi(see,for
example,Floridi,1999,2005a,2008,2013b)andtheFlourishingEthicstheoryofthepresentauthor
whichcombinesideasfromAristotle,Wiener,MoorandFloridi(seeBynum,2006).
Floridi,indevelopinghisinformationethicstheory(henceforthFIE)[2],arguedthatthepurviewof
computerethicsindeedofethicsingeneralshouldbewidenedtoincludemuchmorethansimply
humanbeings,theiractions,intentionsandcharacters.HedevelopedFIEasanothermacroethics
(histerm)whichissimilartoutilitarianism,deontologism,contractualism,andvirtueethics,because
itisintendedtobeapplicabletoallethicalsituations.Ontheotherhand,FIEisdifferentfromthese
moretraditionalWesterntheoriesbecauseitisnotintendedtoreplacethem,butrathertosupplement
themwithfurtherethicalconsiderationsthatgobeyondthetraditionaltheories,andthatcanbe
overridden,sometimes,bytraditionalethicalconsiderations.(Floridi,2006)
ThenameinformationethicsisappropriatetoFloridistheory,becauseittreatseverythingthat
existsasinformationalobjectsorprocesses:
[All]entitieswillbedescribedasclustersofdata,thatis,asinformationalobjects.More
precisely,[anyexistingentity]willbeadiscrete,selfcontained,encapsulatedpackage
containing
i. theappropriatedatastructures,whichconstitutethenatureoftheentityinquestion,
thatis,thestateoftheobject,itsuniqueidentityanditsattributesand
ii. acollectionofoperations,functions,orprocedures,whichareactivatedbyvarious
interactionsorstimuli(thatis,messagesreceivedfromotherobjectsorchanges
withinitself)andcorrespondinglydefinehowtheobjectbehavesorreactstothem.
Atthislevelofabstraction,informationalsystemsassuch,ratherthanjustlivingsystems
ingeneral,areraisedtotheroleofagentsandpatientsofanyaction,withenvironmental
processes,changesandinteractionsequallydescribedinformationally.(Floridi2006a,9
10)
Sinceeverythingthatexists,accordingtoFIE,isaninformationalobjectorprocess,hecallsthe
totalityofallthatexiststheuniverseconsideredasawholetheinfosphere.Objectsand
processesintheinfospherecanbesignificantlydamagedordestroyedbyalteringtheircharacteristic
datastructures.SuchdamageordestructionFloridicallsentropy,anditresultsinpartial
empoverishmentoftheinfosphere.Entropyinthissenseisanevilthatshouldbeavoidedor
minimized,andFloridioffersfourfundamentalprinciples:
0. Entropyoughtnottobecausedintheinfosphere(nulllaw).
1. Entropyoughttobepreventedintheinfosphere.
2. Entropyoughttoberemovedfromtheinfosphere.
3. Theflourishingofinformationalentitiesaswellasthewholeinfosphereoughttobepromoted
bypreserving,cultivatingandenrichingtheirproperties.
FIEisbasedupontheideathateverythingintheinfospherehasatleastaminimumworththatshould
beethicallyrespected,evenifthatworthcanbeoverriddenbyotherconsiderations:
[FIE]suggeststhatthereissomethingevenmoreelementalthanlife,namelybeingthat

is,theexistenceandflourishingofallentitiesandtheirglobalenvironmentand
somethingmorefundamentalthansuffering,namelyentropy.[FIE]holdsthat
being/informationhasanintrinsicworthiness.Itsubstantiatesthispositionbyrecognizing
thatanyinformationalentityhasaSpinozianrighttopersistinitsownstatus,anda
Constructionistrighttoflourish,i.e.,toimproveandenrichitsexistenceandessence.
(Floridi2006a,p.11)
Byconstruingeveryexistingentityintheuniverseasinformational,withatleastaminimalmoral
worth,FIEcansupplementtraditionalethicaltheoriesandgobeyondthembyshiftingthefocusof
onesethicalattentionawayfromtheactions,characters,andvaluesofhumanagentstowardthe
evil(harm,dissolution,destruction)entropysufferedbyobjectsandprocessesinthe
infosphere.Withthisapproach,everyexistingentityhumans,otheranimals,plants,organizations,
evennonlivingartifacts,electronicobjectsincyberspace,piecesofintellectualpropertycanbe
interpretedaspotentialagentsthataffectotherentities,andaspotentialpatientsthatareaffectedby
otherentities.Inthisway,FloriditreatsFIEasapatientbasednonanthropocentricethicaltheoryto
beusedinadditiontothetraditionalagentbasedanthropocentricethicaltheorieslikeutilitarianism,
deontologismandvirtuetheory.
FIE,withitsemphasisonpreservingandenhancingtheinfosphere,enablesFloriditoprovide,
amongotherthings,aninsightfulandpracticalethicaltheoryofrobotbehaviorandthebehaviorof
otherartificialagentslikesoftbotsandcyborgs.(See,forexample,FloridiandSanders,2004.)FIE
isanimportantcomponentofamoreambitiousprojectcoveringtheentirenewfieldofthe
PhilosophyofInformation(histerm).(SeeFloridi2011)

5.ExponentialGrowth
Theparagraphsabovedescribekeycontributionstothehistoryofideasininformationand
computerethics,butthehistoryofadisciplineincludesmuchmore.Thebirthanddevelopmentofa
newacademicfieldrequirecooperationamongacriticalmassofscholars,plusthecreationof
universitycourses,researchcenters,conferences,academicjournals,andmore.Inthisregard,theyear
1985waspivotalforinformationandcomputerethics.ThepublicationofJohnsonstextbook,
ComputerEthics,plusaspecialissueofthejournalMetaphilosophy(October1985)including
especiallyMoorsarticleWhatIsComputerEthics?providedexcellentcurriculummaterialsanda
conceptualfoundationforthefield.Inaddition,Manersearliertrailblazingefforts,andthoseofother
peoplewhohadbeeninspiredbyManer,hadgeneratedareadymadeaudienceofenthusiastic
computerscienceandphilosophyscholars.Thestagewassetforexponentialgrowth.(Theformidable
foundationforcomputerandinformationethics,whichWienerhadlaiddowninthelate1940sand
early1950s,wassofaraheadofitstimethatsocialandethicalthinkersthendidnotfollowhislead
andhelptocreateavibrantandgrowingfieldofcomputerandinformationethicsevenearlierthanthe
1980s.)
IntheUnitedStates,rapidgrowthoccurredininformationandcomputerethicsbeginninginthemid
1980s.In1987theResearchCenteronComputing&SocietywasfoundedatSouthernConnecticut
StateUniversity.Shortlythereafter,theDirector(thepresentauthor)joinedwithWalterManerto
organizetheNationalConferenceonComputingandValues(NCCV),fundedbyAmericas
NationalScienceFoundation,tobringtogethercomputerscientists,philosophers,publicpolicy
makers,lawyers,journalists,sociologists,psychologists,businesspeople,andothers.Thegoalwasto
examineandpushforwardsomeofthemajorsubareasofinformationandcomputerethicsnamely,
computersecurity,computersandprivacy,ownershipofintellectualproperty,computingforpersons
withdisabilities,andtheteachingofcomputerethics.Morethanadozenscholarsfromseveral
differentdisciplinesjoinedwithBynumandManertoplanNCCV,whichoccurredinAugust1991at
SouthernConnecticutStateUniversity.FourhundredpeoplefromthirtytwoAmericanstatesand
sevenothercountriesattendedandtheconferencegeneratedawealthofnewcomputerethics
materialsmonographs,videoprogramsandanextensivebibliographywhichweredisseminatedto

hundredsofcollegesanduniversitiesduringthefollowingtwoyears.
Inthatsamedecade,professionalethicsadvocates,suchasDonaldGotterbarn,KeithMillerand
DianneMartinandprofessionalorganizations,suchasComputerProfessionalsforSocial
Responsibility,theElectronicFrontierFoundation,andtheSpecialInterestGrouponComputingand
Society(SIGCAS)oftheACMspearheadedprojectsfocuseduponprofessionalresponsibilityfor
computerpractitioners.Informationandcomputerethicsbecamearequiredcomponentof
undergraduatecomputerscienceprogramsthatwerenationallyaccreditedbytheComputerSciences
AccreditationBoard.Inaddition,theannualComputers,FreedomandPrivacyconferencesbeganin
1991(seewww.cfp.org),andtheACMadoptedanewversionofitsCodeofEthicsandProfessional
Conductin1992.
In1995,rapidgrowthofinformationandcomputerethicsspreadtoEuropewhenthepresentauthor
joinedwithSimonRogersonofDeMontfortUniversityinEnglandtocreatetheCentrefor
ComputingandSocialResponsibilityandtoorganizethefirstcomputerethicsconferenceinEurope,
ETHICOMP95.Thatconferenceincludedattendeesfromfourteendifferentcountries,mostlyin
Europe,anditbecameakeyfactoringeneratingacriticalmassofcomputerethicsscholarsin
Europe.After1995,every18months,anotherETHICOMPconferenceoccurred,movingfrom
countrytocountryinEuropeandbeyondSpain,theNetherlands,Italy,Poland,Portugal,Greece,
Sweden,Japan,China,Argentina,Denmark,France.Inaddition,in1999,withassistancefrom
BynumandRogerson,theAustralianscholarsJohnWeckertandChristopherSimpsoncreatedthe
AustralianInstituteofComputerEthicsandorganizedAICEC99(Melbourne,Australia),whichwas
thefirstinternationalcomputerethicsconferencesouthoftheequator.AnumberofAICE
conferenceshaveoccurredsincethen(seehttp://auscomputerethics.com).
AcentralfigureintherapidgrowthofinformationandcomputerethicsinEuropewasSimon
Rogerson.InadditiontocreatingtheCentreforComputingandSocialResponsibilityatDeMontfort
UniversityandcoheadingtheinfluentialETHICOMPconferences,healso(1)addedcomputerethics
toDeMontfortUniversityscurriculum,(2)createdagraduateprogramwithadvancedcomputer
ethicsdegrees,includingPhDs,and(3)cofoundedandcoedited(withBenFairweather)two
computerethicsjournalsTheJournalofInformation,CommunicationandEthicsinSocietyin2003
(seethesectionOtherInternetResourcesbelow),andtheelectronicjournalTheETHICOMP
Journalin2004(seeOtherInternetResourcesbelow).RogersonalsoservedontheInformation
TechnologyCommitteeoftheBritishParliament,andheparticipatedinseveralcomputerethics
projectswithagenciesoftheEuropeanUnion.
OtherimportantcomputerethicsdevelopmentsinEuropeinthelate1990sandearly2000sincluded,
forexample,(1)LucianoFloridiscreationoftheInformationEthicsResearchGroupatOxford
Universityinthemid1990s(2)JeroenvandenHovensfounding,in1997,oftheCEPE(Computer
Ethics:PhilosophicalEnquiry)seriesofconferences,whichoccurredalternatelyinEuropeand
America(3)vandenHovenscreationofthejournalEthicsandInformationTechnologyin1999(4)
RafaelCapurroscreationoftheInternationalCenterforInformationEthicsin1999(5)Capurros
creationofthejournalInternationalReviewofInformationEthicsin2004andBerndCarstenStahls
creationofTheInternationalJournalofTechnologyandHumanInteractionin2005.
Insummary,since1985computerethicsdevelopmentshaveproliferatedexponentiallywithnew
conferencesandconferenceseries,neworganizations,newresearchcenters,newjournals,textbooks,
websites,universitycourses,universitydegreeprograms,anddistinguishedprofessorships.
Additionalsubfieldsandtopicsininformationandcomputerethicscontinuallyemergeas
informationtechnologyitselfgrowsandproliferates.Recentnewtopicsincludeonlineethics,
agentethics(robots,softbots),cyborgethics(parthuman,partmachine),theopensource
movement,electronicgovernment,globalinformationethics,informationtechnologyandgenetics,
computingfordevelopingcountries,computingandterrorism,ethicsandnanotechnology,toname
onlyafewexamples.(Forspecificpublicationsandexamples,seethelistofselectedresources
below.)

Comparedtomanyotherscholarlydisciplines,thefieldofcomputerethicsisveryyoung.Ithas
existedonlysincethelate1940swhenNorbertWienercreatedit.Duringthenextfewdecades,it
grewverylittlebecauseWienersinsightsweresofaraheadofeveryoneelses.Beginningin1985,
however,informationandcomputerethicshasgrownexponentially,firstinAmerica,theninEurope,
andthenglobally.

Bibliography
Adam,A.(2000),GenderandComputerEthics,ComputersandSociety,30(4):1724.
Adam,A.andJ.OforiAmanfo(2000),DoesGenderMatterinComputerEthics?Ethicsand
InformationTechnology,2(1):3747.
Anderson,R,D.Johnson,D.GotterbarnandJ.Perrolle(1993),UsingtheNewACMCodeofEthics
inDecisionMaking,CommunicationsoftheACM,36:98107.
Bohman,James(2008),TheTransformationofthePublicSphere:PoliticalAuthority,
CommunicativeFreedom,andInternetPublics,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),
InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,6692.
Brennan,G.andP.Pettit(2008),Esteem,Identifiability,andtheInternet,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.
Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress,17594.
Brey,P.(2001),DisclosiveComputerEthics,inR.SpinelloandH.Tavani(eds.),Readingsin
CyberEthics,Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlett.
(2006a),EvaluatingtheSocialandCulturalImplicationsoftheInternet,Computersand
Society,36(3):4144.
(2006b),SocialandEthicalDimensionsofComputerMediatedEducation,Journalof
Information,Communication&EthicsinSociety,4(2):91102.
(2008),DoWeHaveMoralDutiesTowardInformationObjects,EthicsandInformation
Technology,10(23):109114.
(2012),AnticipatoryEthicsforEmergingTechnologies,Nanoethics,6(1):113.
(eds.)(2012),TheGoodLifeinaTechnologicalAge,NewYork,NY:Routledge.
Bynum,T.(1982),ADisciplineinitsInfancy,TheDallasMorningNews,January12,1982,D/1,
D/6.
(1999),TheDevelopmentofComputerEthicsasaPhilosophicalFieldofStudy,TheAustralian
JournalofProfessionalandAppliedEthics,1(1):129.
(2000),TheFoundationofComputerEthics,ComputersandSociety,30(2):613.
(2004),EthicalChallengestoCitizensoftheAutomaticAge:NorbertWieneronthe
InformationSociety,JournalofInformation,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,2(2):65
74.
(2005),NorbertWienersVision:theImpactoftheAutomaticAgeonourMoralLives,inR.
Cavalier(ed.),TheImpactoftheInternetonourMoralLives,Albany,NY:SUNYPress,1125.
(2006),FlourishingEthics,EthicsandInformationTechnology,8(4):157173.
(2008a),MilestonesintheHistoryofInformationandComputerEthics,inK.HimmaandH.
Tavani(eds.),TheHandbookofInformationandComputerEthics,NewYork:JohnWiley,25
48.
(2008b),NorbertWienerandtheRiseofInformationEthics,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.
Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge,UK:Cambridge
UniversityPress,825.
(2008c),ACopernicanRevolutioninEthics?,inG.CrnkovicandS.Stuart(eds.),
Computation,Information,Cognition:TheNexusandtheLiminal,Cambridge,UK:Cambridge
ScholarsPublishing,302329.
(2010a),HistoricalRootsofInformationEthics,inL.Floridi(ed.),HandbookofInformation
andComputerEthics,Oxford,UK:WileyBlackwell,2038.
(2010b),PhilosophyintheInformationAge,inP.Allo(ed.),LucianoFloridiandthe

PhilosophyofInformation,Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,420442.
Bynum,T.andP.Schubert(1997),HowtodoComputerEthicsACaseStudy:TheElectronicMall
Bodensee,inJ.vandenHoven(ed.),ComputerEthicsPhilosophicalEnquiry,Rotterdam:
ErasmusUniversityPress,8595.
Capurro,R.(2007a),InformationEthicsforandfromAfrica,InternationalReviewofInformation
Ethics,2007:313.
(2007b),InterculturalInformationEthics,inR.Capurro,J.FrhbauerandT.Hausmanninger
(eds.),LocalizingtheInternet:EthicalIssuesinInterculturalPerspective,(ICIESeries,Volume
4),Munich:Fink,2007:2138.
(2006),TowardsanOntologicalFoundationforInformationEthics,EthicsandInformation
Technology,8(4):157186.
(2004),TheGermanDebateontheInformationSociety,TheJournalofInformation,
CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,2(Supplement):1718.
Capurro,R.andJ.Britz(2010),InSearchofaCodeofGlobalInformationEthics:TheRoad
TravelledandNewHorizons,EthicalSpace,7(2/3):2836.
Capurro,R.andM.Nagenborg(eds.)(2009)EthicsandRobotics,Heidelberg:Akademische
Verlagsgesellschaft,IOSPress.
Cavalier,R.(ed.)(2005),TheImpactoftheInternetonOurMoralLives,Albany,NY:SUNYPress.
Cocking,D.(2008),PluralSelvesandRelationalIdentity:IntimacyandPrivacyOnline,InJ.van
denHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress,12341.
deLaat,P.,(2010),HowCanContributionstoOpenSourceCommunitiesbeTrusted?,Ethicsand
InformationTechnology,12(4):327341.
(2012),CoercionorEmpowerment?ModerationofContentinWikipediaasEssentially
ContestedBureaucraticRules,EthicsandInformationTechnology,14(2):123135.
Edgar,S.(1997),MoralityandMachines:PerspectivesonComputerEthics,Sudbury,MA:Jonesand
Bartlett.
Elgesem,D.(1995),DataPrivacyandLegalArgumentation,CommunicationandCognition,28(1):
91114.
(1996),Privacy,RespectforPersons,andRisk,inC.Ess(ed.),PhilosophicalPerspectiveson
ComputerMediatedCommunication,Albany:SUNYPress,4566.
(2002),WhatisSpecialabouttheEthicalProblemsinInternetResearch?Ethicsand
InformationTechnology,4(3):195203.
(2008),InformationTechnologyResearchEthics,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),
InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,354
75.
Ess,C.(1996),ThePoliticalComputer:Democracy,CMC,andHabermas,inC.Ess(ed.),
PhilosophicalPerspectivesonComputerMediatedCommunication,Albany:SUNYPress,197
230.
(ed.)(2001a),Culture,Technology,Communication:TowardsanInterculturalGlobalVillage,
Albany:SUNYPress.
(2001b),WhatsCulturegottodowithit?CulturalCollisionsintheElectronicGlobalVillage,
inC.Ess(ed.),Culture,Technology,Communication:TowardsanInterculturalGlobalVillage,
Albany:SUNYPress,150.
(2004),ComputerMediatedCommunicationandHumanComputerInteraction,inL.Floridi
(ed.),TheBlackwellGuidetothePhilosophyofComputingandInformation,Oxford:Blackwell,
7691.
(2005),MoralImperativesforLifeinanInterculturalGlobalVillage,inR.Cavalier(ed.),The
ImpactoftheInternetonourMoralLives,Albany:SUNYPress,161193.
(2008),CultureandGlobalNetworks:HopeforaGlobalEthics?inJ.vandenHovenandJ.
Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress,195225.
(2013),Global?MediaEthics:Issues,Challenges,Requirements,ResolutionsinS.Ward(ed.),
GlobalMediaEthics:ProblemsandPerspectives,Oxford:WileyBlackwell,253271.

Fairweather,B.(1998),NoPAPA:WhyIncompleteCodesofEthicsareWorsethanNoneatall,in
G.Collste(ed.),EthicsandInformationTechnology,NewDelhi:NewAcademicPublishers.
(2011),EvenGreenerIT:BringingGreenTheoryandGreenITTogether,Journalof
Information,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,9(2):6882.
Flanagan,M.,D.Howe,andH.Nissenbaum(2008),EmbodyingValueinTechnology:Theoryand
Practice,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoral
Philosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,32253.
Flanagan,M.andH.Nissenbaum(2014),ValuesatPlayinDigitalGames,Cambridge,MA:MIT
Press.
Floridi,L.(1999),InformationEthics:OntheTheoreticalFoundationsofComputerEthics,Ethics
andInformationTechnology,1(1):3756.
(ed.)(2004),TheBlackwellGuidetothePhilosophyofComputingandInformation,Oxford:
Blackwell.
(2005b),InternetEthics:TheConstructionistValuesofHomoPoieticus,inR.Cavalier(ed.),
TheImpactoftheInternetonourMoralLives,Albany:SUNYPress,195214.
(2006a),InformationEthics:ItsNatureandScope,ComputersandSociety,36(3):2136.
(2006b),InformationTechnologiesandtheTragedyoftheGoodWill,EthicsandInformation
Technology,8(4):253262.
(2008),InformationEthics:ItsNatureandScope,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),
InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,4065.
(ed.)(2010),HandbookofInformationandComputerEthics,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversity
Press.
(2011),ThePhilosophyofInformation,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
(2013a),DistributedMoralityinanInformationSociety,ScienceandEngineeringEthics,
19(3):727743.
(2013b),TheEthicsofInformation,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
(2014),TheFourthRevolutionHowtheInfosphereisReshapingHumanReality,Oxford:
OxfordUniversityPress.
Floridi,L.andJ.Sanders(2004),TheFoundationalistDebateinComputerEthics,inR.Spinello
andH.Tavani(eds.),ReadingsinCyberEthics,2ndedition,Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlett,
8195.
Forester,T.andP.Morrison(1990),ComputerEthics:CautionaryTalesandEthicalDilemmasin
Computing,Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
Fried,C.(1984),Privacy,inF.Schoeman(ed.),PhilosophicalDimensionsofPrivacy,Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Friedman,B.(ed.)(1997),HumanValuesandtheDesignofComputerTechnology,Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Friedman,B.andH.Nissenbaum(1996),BiasinComputerSystems,ACMTransactionson
InformationSystems,14(3):330347.
Gerdes,A.(2013),EthicalIssuesinHumanRobotInteraction,inH.Nyknen,O.Riis,andJ.Zelle
(eds.),TheoreticalandAppliedEthics,Aalborg,Denmark:AalborgUniversityPress,125143.
Gert,B.(1999),CommonMoralityandComputing,EthicsandInformationTechnology,1(1):57
64.
Goldman,A.(2008),TheSocialEpistemologyofBlogging,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert
(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,
11122.
Gordon,W.(2008),MoralPhilosophy,InformationTechnology,andCopyright:TheGrokster
Case,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoral
Philosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,270300.
GorniakKocikowska,K.(1996),TheComputerRevolutionandtheProblemofGlobalEthics,inT.
BynumandS.Rogerson(eds.),GlobalInformationEthics,Guildford,UK:Opragen
Publications,17790.
(2005)FromComputerEthicstotheEthicsoftheGlobalICTSociety,inT.Bynum,G.Collste,
andS.Rogerson(eds.),ProceedingsofETHICOMP2005(CDROM),CenterforComputingand

SocialResponsibility,LinkpingsUniversity.AlsoinLibraryHiTech,25(1):4757.
(2007),ICT,GlobalizationandthePursuitofHappiness:TheProblemofChange,in
ProceedingsofETHICOMP2007,Tokyo:MeijiUniversityPress.
(2008),ICTandtheTensionbetweenOldandNew:TheHumanFactor,Journalof
Information,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,6(1):427.
Gotterbarn,D.(1991),ComputerEthics:ResponsibilityRegained,NationalForum:ThePhiBeta
KappaJournal,71:2631.
(2001),InformaticsandProfessionalResponsibility,ScienceandEngineeringEthics,7(2):
22130.
(2002)ReducingSoftwareFailures:AddressingtheEthicalRisksoftheSoftwareDevelopment
LifeCycle,AustralianJournalofInformationSystems,9(2):15565.
(2008)OnceMoreuntotheBreach:ProfessionalResponsibilityandComputerEthics,Science
andEngineeringEthics,14(1):235239.
(2009)ThePublicisthePriority:MakingDecisionsUsingtheSECodeofEthics,IEEE
Computer,June:4249.
Gotterbarn,D.,K.Miller,andS.Rogerson(1997),SoftwareEngineeringCodeofEthics,
InformationSociety,40(11):110118.
Gotterbarn,D.andK.Miller(2004),ComputerEthicsintheUndergraduateCurriculum:Case
StudiesandtheJointSoftwareEngineersCode,JournalofComputingSciencesinColleges,
20(2):156167.
Gotterbarn,D.andS.Rogerson(2005),ResponsibleRiskAnalysisforSoftwareDevelopment:
CreatingtheSoftwareDevelopmentImpactStatement,CommunicationsoftheAssociationfor
InformationSystems,15(40):73050.
Grodzinsky,F.(1997),ComputerAccessforStudentswithDisabilities,SIGSCEBulletin,29(1):
292295[Availableonline].
(1999),ThePractitionerfromWithin:RevisitingtheVirtues,ComputersandSociety,29(2):9
15.
Grodzinsky,F.,A.GumbusandS.Lilley(2010),EthicalImplicationsofInternetMonitoring:A
ComparativeStudy,InformationSystemFrontiers,12(4):433431.
Grodzinsky,F.,K.MillerandM.Wolf(2003),EthicalIssuesinOpenSourceSoftware,Journalof
Information,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,1(4):193205.
(2008),TheEthicsofDesigningArtificialAgents,EthicsandInformationTechnology,10(2
3):115121.
(2011),DevelopingArtificialAgentsWorthyofTrust,EthicsandInformationTechnology,
13(1):1727.
Grodzinsky,F.andH.Tavani(2002),EthicalReflectionsonCyberstalking,ComputersandSociety,
32(1):2232.
(2004),Verizonvs.theRIAA:ImplicationsforPrivacyandDemocracy,inJ.Herkert(ed.),
ProceedingsofISTAS2004:TheInternationalSymposiumonTechnologyandSociety,Los
Alamitos,CA:IEEEComputerSocietyPress.
(2010),ApplyingtheContextualIntegrityModelofPrivacytoPersonalBlogsinthe
Blogosphere,InternationalJournalofInternetResearchEthics,3(1):3847.
Grodzinsky,F.andM.Wolf(2008),EthicalIssuesinFreeandOpenSourceSoftware,inK.Himma
andH.Tavani(eds.),TheHandbookofInformationandComputerEthics,Hoboken,NJ:Wiley,
245272.
Himma,K.(2003),TheRelationshipBetweentheUniquenessofComputerEthicsandits
IndependenceasaDisciplineinAppliedEthics,EthicsandInformationTechnology,5(4):225
237.
(2004),TheMoralSignificanceoftheInterestinInformation:ReflectionsonaFundamental
RighttoInformation,JournalofInformation,Communication,andEthicsinSociety,2(4):191
202.
(2007),ArtificialAgency,Consciousness,andtheCriteriaforMoralAgency:WhatProperties
MustanArtificialAgentHavetobeaMoralAgent?inProceedingsofETHICOMP2007,
Tokyo:MeijiUniversityPress.

(2004),TheresSomethingaboutMary:TheMoralValueofThingsquaInformationObjects,
EthicsandInformationTechnology,6(3):145159.
(2006),HackingasPoliticallyMotivatedCivilDisobedience:IsHacktivismMorallyJustified?
inK.Himma(ed.),ReadingsinInternetSecurity:Hacking,Counterhacking,andSociety,
Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlett.
Himma,K.andH.Tavani(eds.)(2008),TheHandbookofInformationandComputerEthics,
Hoboken,NJ:Wiley.
Hongladarom,S.(2011),PersonalIdentityandtheSelfintheOnlineandOfflineWorlds,Minds
andMachines,21(4):533548.
(2013),UbiquitousComputing,EmpathyandtheSelf,AIandSociety,28(2):227236.
Huff,C.andT.Finholt(eds.)(1994),SocialIssuesinComputing:PuttingComputersinTheirPlace,
NewYork:McGrawHill.
Huff,C.andD.Martin(1995),ComputingConsequences:AFrameworkforTeachingEthical
Computing,CommunicationsoftheACM,38(12):7584.
Huff,C.(2002),Gender,SoftwareDesign,andOccupationalEquity,SIGCSEBulletin:Inroads,34:
112115.
(2004),UnintentionalPowerintheDesignofComputingSystems.inT.BynumandS.
Rogerson(eds.),ComputerEthicsandProfessionalResponsibility,Oxford:Blackwell.
Huff,C.,D.Johnson,andK.Miller(2003),VirtualHarmsandRealResponsibility,Technologyand
SocietyMagazine(IEEE),22(2):1219.
Huff,C.andL.Barnard(2009),GoodComputing:LifeStoriesofMoralExemplarsinthe
ComputingProfession,IEEETechnologyandSociety,28(3):4754.
Introna,L.(1997),PrivacyandtheComputer:WhyWeNeedPrivacyintheInformationSociety,
Metaphilosophy,28(3):259275.
(2002),Onthe(Im)PossibilityofEthicsinaMediatedWorld,InformationandOrganization,
12(2):7184.
(2005a),DisclosiveEthicsandInformationTechnology:DisclosingFacialRecognition
Systems,EthicsandInformationTechnology,7(2):7586.
(2005b)PhenomenologicalApproachestoEthicsandInformationTechnology,TheStanford
EncyclopediaofPhilosophy(Fall2005Edition),EdwardN.Zalta(ed.),URL=
<http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2005/entries/ethicsitphenomenology/>.
Introna,L.andH.Nissenbaum(2000),ShapingtheWeb:WhythePoliticsofSearchEngines
Matters,TheInformationSociety,16(3):117.
Introna,L.andN.Pouloudi(2001),PrivacyintheInformationAge:Stakeholders,Interestsand
Values.inJ.Sheth(ed.),InternetMarketing,FortWorth,TX:HarcourtCollegePublishers,
373388.
Johnson,D.(1985),ComputerEthics,FirstEdition,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHallSecond
Edition,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHall,1994ThirdEditionUpperSaddleRiver,NJ:
PrenticeHall,2001FourthEdition(withKeithMiller),NewYork:Pearson,2009.
(1997a),EthicsOnline,CommunicationsoftheACM,40(1):6065.
(1997b),IstheGlobalInformationInfrastructureaDemocraticTechnology?Computersand
Society,27(4):2026.
(2004),ComputerEthics,inL.Floridi(ed.),TheBlackwellGuidetothePhilosophyof
ComputingandInformation,Oxford:Blackwell,6575.
(2011),SoftwareAgents,AnticipatoryEthics,andAccountability,inG.Merchant,B.Allenby,
andJ.Herkert,(eds.),TheGrowingGapBetweenEmergingTechnologiesandLegalEthical
Oversight:TheInternationalLibraryofEthics,LawandTechnology,7:6176.Heidelberg,
Germany:Springer.
Johnson,D.andH.Nissenbaum(eds.)(1995),Computing,Ethics&SocialValues,EnglewoodCliffs,
NJ:PrenticeHall.
Johnson,D.andT.Powers(2008),ComputersasSurrogateAgents,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.
Weckert,(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress,25169.
Kocikowski,A.(1996),GeographyandComputerEthics:AnEasternEuropeanPerspective,inT.

BynumandS.Rogerson(eds.),ScienceandEngineeringEthics(SpecialIssue:Global
InformationEthics),2(2):20110.
Lane,J.,V.Stodden,S.Bender,andandH.Nissenbaum(eds.)(2014),Privacy,BigDataandthe
PublicGood,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Lessig,L.(2004),TheLawsofCyberspace,inR.SpinelloandH.Tavani(eds.),Readingsin
CyberEthics,Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlett,SecondEdition,134144.
Lloyd,S.(2006),ProgrammingtheUniverse,NewYork:AlfredA.KnopfPublishers.
Maner,W.(1980),StarterKitinComputerEthics,HydePark,NY:HelvetiaPressandtheNational
InformationandResourceCenterforTeachingPhilosophy.
(1996),UniqueEthicalProblemsinInformationTechnology,inT.BynumandS.Rogerson
(eds.),ScienceandEngineeringEthics(SpecialIssue:GlobalInformationEthics),2(2):137
154.
Martin,C.andD.Martin(1990),ProfessionalCodesofConductandComputerEthicsEducation,
SocialScienceComputerReview,8(1):96108.
Martin,C.,C.Huff,D.Gotterbarn,K.Miller,etal.(1996),AFrameworkforImplementingand
TeachingtheSocialandEthicalImpactofComputing,EducationandInformation
Technologies,1(2):101122.
Martin,C.,C.Huff,D.Gotterbarn,andK.Miller(1996),ImplementingaTenthStrandinthe
ComputerScienceCurriculum(SecondReportoftheImpactCSSteeringCommittee),
CommunicationsoftheACM,39(12):7584.
Marx,G.(2001),IdentityandAnonymity:SomeConceptualDistinctionsandIssuesforResearch,
inJ.CaplanandJ.Torpey(eds.),DocumentingIndividualIdentity,Princeton:Princeton
UniversityPress.
Mather,K.(2005),TheTheoreticalFoundationofComputerEthics:StewardshipoftheInformation
Environment,inContemporaryIssuesinGovernance(ProceedingsofGovNetAnnual
Conference,Melbourne,Australia,2830November,2005),Melbourne:MonashUniversity.
Matthews,S.(2008),IdentityandInformationTechnology.inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert
(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,
14260.
Miller,K.(2005),Webstandards:WhySoManyStrayfromtheNarrowPath,Scienceand
EngineeringEthics,11(3):477479.
Miller,K.andD.Larson(2005a),AgileMethodsandComputerEthics:RaisingtheLevelof
DiscourseaboutTechnologicalChoices,IEEETechnologyandSociety,24(4):3643.
(2005b),AngelsandArtifacts:MoralAgentsintheAgeofComputersandNetworks,Journal
ofInformation,Communication&EthicsinSociety,3(3):151157.
Miller,S.(2008),CollectiveResponsibilityandInformationandCommunicationTechnology.inJ.
vandenHovenandJ>Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,
Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,22650.
Moor,J.(1979),ArethereDecisionsComputersShouldNeverMake?NatureandSystem,1:217
29.
(1985)WhatIsComputerEthics?Metaphilosophy,16(4):26675.
(1996),Reason,RelativityandResponsibilityinComputerEthics,inComputersandSociety,
28(1)(1998):1421originallyakeynoteaddressatETHICOMP96inMadrid,Spain,1996.
(1997),TowardsaTheoryofPrivacyintheInformationAge,ComputersandSociety,27(3):
2732.
(1999),JustConsequentialismandComputing,EthicsandInformationTechnology,1(1):65
69.
(2001),TheFutureofComputerEthics:YouAintSeenNothinYet,EthicsandInformation
Technology,3(2):8991.
(2005),ShouldWeLetComputersGetunderOurSkin?inR.Cavalier,TheImpactofthe
InternetonourMoralLives,Albany:SUNYPress,121138.
(2006),TheNature,Importance,andDifficultyofMachineEthics,IEEEIntelligentSystems,
21(4):1821.
(2007),TakingtheIntentionalStanceTowardRobotEthics,AmericanPhilosophical

AssociationNewsletters,6(2):111119.
(2008)WhyWeNeedBetterEthicsforEmergingTechnologies,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.
Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress,2639.
Murata,K.andY.Orito(2010),JapaneseRiskSociety:TryingtoCreateCompleteSecurityand
SafetyUsingInformationandCommunicationTechnology,ComputersandSociety,ACM
SIGCAS40(3):3849.
Murata,K.,Y.OritoandY.Fukuta(2014),SocialAttitudesofYoungPeopleinJapanTowards
OnlinePrivacy,JournalofLaw,InformationandScience,23(1):137157.
Nissenbaum,H.(1995),ShouldICopyMyNeighborsSoftware?inD.JohnsonandH.
Nissenbaum(eds),Computers,Ethics,andSocialResponsibility,EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:Prentice
Hall.
(1997),CanWeProtectPrivacyinPublic?inProceedingsofComputerEthicsPhilosophical
Enquiry97(CEPE97),Rotterdam:ErasmusUniversityPress,191204reprintedNissenbaum
1998a.
(1998a),ProtectingPrivacyinanInformationAge:TheProblemofPrivacyinPublic,Lawand
Philosophy,17:559596.
(1998b),ValuesintheDesignofComputerSystems,ComputersinSociety,1998:3839.
(1999),TheMeaningofAnonymityinanInformationAge,TheInformationSociety,15:141
144.
(2005a),HackersandtheContestedOntologyofCyberspace,inR.Cavalier(ed.),TheImpact
oftheInternetonourMoralLives,Albany:SUNYPress,139160.
(2005b),WhereComputerSecurityMeetsNationalSecurity,EthicsandInformation
Technology,7(2):6173.
(2011),AContextualApproachtoPrivacyOnline,Daedalus,140(4):3248.
Ocholla,D,J.Britz,R.Capurro,andC.Bester,(eds.)(2013),InformationEthicsinAfrica:Cross
CuttingThemes,AfricanCenterofExcellenceforInformationEthics,Pretoria,SouthAfrica.
Orito,Y.(2011),TheCounterControlRevolution:SilentControlofIndividualsThrough
DataveillanceSystems,JournalofInformation,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,9(1):5
19.
Parker,D.(1968),RulesofEthicsinInformationProcessing,CommunicationsoftheACM,11:
198201.
(1979),EthicalConflictsinComputerScienceandTechnology.Arlington,VA:AFIPSPress.
Parker,D.,S.SwopeandB.Baker(1990),EthicalConflictsinInformation&ComputerScience,
Technology&Business,Wellesley,MA:QEDInformationSciences.
Pecorino,P.andW.Maner(1985),AProposalforaCourseonComputerEthics,Metaphilosophy,
16(4):327337.
Pettit,P.(2008),Trust,Reliance,andtheInternet,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),
InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,161
74.
Powers,T.M.(2006),ProspectsforaKantianMachine,IEEEIntelligentSystems,21(4):4651.
AlsoinM.AndersonandS.Anderson(eds.),IEEEIntelligentSystems,Cambridge,UK:
CambridgeUniversityPress,2011.
(2009),MachinesandMoralReasoning,PhilosophyNow,72:1516.
(2011),IncrementalMachineEthics,IEEERoboticsandAutomation,18(1):5158.
(2013),OntheMoralAgencyofComputers,Topoi:AnInternationalReviewofPhilosophy,
32(2):227236.
Rogerson,S.(1996),TheEthicsofComputing:TheFirstandSecondGenerations,TheUK
BusinessEthicsNetworkNews,6:14.
(1998),ComputerandInformationEthics,inR.Chadwick(ed.),EncyclopediaofApplied
Ethics,SanDiego,CA:AcademicPress,563570.
(2004),TheEthicsofSoftwareDevelopmentProjectManagement,inT.BynumandS.
Rogerson(eds.),ComputerEthicsandProfessionalResponsibility,Oxford:Blackwell,119128.
(1995),Cyberspace:TheEthicalFrontier,TheTimesHigherEducationSupplement(The

LondonTimes),No.1179,June,9,1995,iv.
(2002),TheEthicalAttitudesofInformationSystemsProfessionals:OutcomesofanInitial
Survey,TelematicsandInformatics,19:2136.
(1998),TheEthicsofSoftwareProjectManagement,inG.Collste(ed.),Ethicsand
InformationTechnology,NewDelhi:NewAcademicPublishers,137154.
Sojka,J.(1996),BusinessEthicsandComputerEthics:TheViewfromPoland,inT.BynumandS.
Rogerson(eds.),GlobalInformationEthics,Guilford,UK:OpragenPublications(aspecialissue
ofScienceandEngineeringEthics)191200.
Sraker,J.(2012),HowShallICompareThee?ComparingthePrudentialValueofActualand
VirtualFriendshipEthicsandInformationTechnology,14(3):209219.
Spafford,E.,K.Heaphy,andD.Ferbrache(eds.)(1989),ComputerViruses:DealingwithElectronic
VandalismandProgrammedThreats,Arlington,VA:ADAPSO(nowITAA).
Spafford,E.(1992),AreComputerHackerBreakInsEthical?JournalofSystemsandSoftware,17:
4147.
Spinello,R.(1997),CaseStudiesinInformationandComputerEthics,UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:
PrenticeHall.
(2000),CyberEthics:MoralityandLawinCyberspace,Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlettFifth
Edition,2014.
Spinello,R.andH.Tavani(2001a),TheInternet,EthicalValues,andConceptualFrameworks:An
IntroductiontoCyberethics,ComputersandSociety,31(2):57.
(eds.)(2001b),ReadingsinCyberEthics,Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlettSecondEdition,2004.
(eds.)(2005),IntellectualPropertyRightsinaNetworkedWorld:TheoryandPractice,Hershey,
PA:IdeaGroup/InformationSciencePublishing.
Stahl,B.(2004a),Information,EthicsandComputers:TheProblemofAutonomousMoralAgents,
MindsandMachines,14:6783.
(2004b),ResponsibleManagementofInformationSystems,Hershey,PA:IdeaGroup/Information
SciencePublishing.
(2005),TheEthicalProblemofFramingEGovernmentinTermsofECommerce,Electronic
JournalofEGovernment,3(2):7786.
(2006),ResponsibleComputers?ACaseforAscribingQuasiresponsibilitytoComputers
IndependentofPersonhoodorAgency,EthicsandInformationTechnology,8(4):205213.
(2011),ITforaBetterFuture:HowtoIntegrateEthics,PoliticsandInnovation,Journalof
Information,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,9(3):140156.
(2013),VirtualSuicideandOtherEthicalIssuesofEmergingInformationTechnologies,
Futures,50:3543.
(2014),ParticipatoryDesignasEthicalPracticeConcepts,RealityandConditions,Journalof
Information,CommunicationandEthicsinSociety,12(1):1013.
Stahl,B.,R.Heersmink,P.Goujon,C.Flick.J.vandenHoven,K.Wakunuma,V.Ikonen,andM.
Rader(2010),IdentifyingtheEthicsofEmergingInformationandCommunication
Technologies,InternationalJournalofTechnoethics,1(4):2038.
Sullins,J.(2006),WhenIsaRobotaMoralAgent?,InternationalReviewofInformationEthics,
6(1):2330.
(2010),RoboWarfare:CanRobotsBeMoreEthicalthanHumansontheBattlefield?,Ethics
andInformationTechnology,12(3):263275.
(2013),RoboethicsandTelerobotWeaponsSystems,inD.Michelfelder,N.McCarthyandD.
Goldberg(eds.),PhilosophyandEngineering:ReflectionsonPractice,PrinciplesandProcess,
Dordrecht:Springer,229237.
Sunstein,C.(2008),DemocracyandtheInternet,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),
InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,93
110.
Taddeo,M.(2012),InformationWarfare:APhilosophicalPerspective,PhilosophyandTechnology,
25(1):105120.
Tavani,H.(ed.)(1996),Computing,Ethics,andSocialResponsibility:ABibliography,PaloAlto,
CA:ComputerProfessionalsforSocialResponsibilityPress.

(1999a),PrivacyandtheInternet,ProceedingsoftheFourthAnnualEthicsandTechnology
Conference,ChestnutHill,MA:BostonCollegePress,11425.
(1999b),PrivacyOnLine,ComputersandSociety,29(4):1119.
(2002),TheUniquenessDebateinComputerEthics:WhatExactlyisatIssueandWhyDoesit
Matter?EthicsandInformationTechnology,4(1):3754.
(2004),EthicsandTechnology:EthicalIssuesinanAgeofInformationandCommunication
Technology,Hoboken,NJ:WileySecondEdition,2007ThirdEdition,2011FourthEdition,
2013.
(2005),TheImpactoftheInternetonourMoralCondition:DoWeNeedaNewFrameworkof
Ethics?inR.Cavalier(ed.),TheImpactoftheInternetonourMoralLives,Albany:SUNY
Press,215237.
(2006),Ethics,Computing,andGenomics,Sudbury,MA:JonesandBartlett.
Tavani,H.andJ.Moor(2001),PrivacyProtection,ControlofInformation,andPrivacyEnhancing
Technologies,ComputersandSociety,31(1):611.
Turilli,M.andL.Floridi,(2009),TheEthicsofInformationTransparency,EthicsandInformation
Technology,11(2):105112.
Turilli,M.,A.VacaroandM.Taddeo,(2010),TheCaseofOnlineTrust,Knowledge,Technology
andPolicy,23(3/4):333345.
Turkle,S.(1984),TheSecondSelf:ComputersandtheHumanSpirit,NewYork:Simon&Schuster.
(2011),AloneTogether:WhyWeExpectMorefromTechnologyandLessfromEachOther,New
York:BasicBooks.
Turner,A.J.(2011),SummaryoftheACM/IEEECSJointCurriculumTaskForceReport:
ComputingCurricula,1991,CommunicationsoftheACM,34(6):6984.
Turner,E.(2006),TeachingGenderInclusiveComputerEthics,inI.Trauth(ed.),Encyclopediaof
GenderandInformationTechnology:ExploringtheContributions,Challenges,Issuesand
ExperiencesofWomeninInformationTechnology,Hershey,PA:IdeaGroup/Information
SciencePublishing,11421147.
vandenHoven,J.(1997a),ComputerEthicsandMoralMethodology,Metaphilosophy,28(3):234
48.
(1997b),PrivacyandtheVarietiesofInformationalWrongdoing,ComputersandSociety,
27(3):3337.
(1998),Ethics,SocialEpistemics,ElectronicCommunicationandScientificResearch,
EuropeanReview,7(3):341349.
(2008a),InformationTechnology,Privacy,andtheProtectionofPersonalData,inJ.vanden
HovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress,301321.
vandenHoven,J.andE.Rooksby(2008),DistributiveJusticeandtheValueofInformation:A
(Broadly)RawlsianApproach,inJ.vandenHovenandJ.Weckert(eds.),Information
TechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,37696.
vandenHoven,J.andJ.Weckert(2008),InformationTechnologyandMoralPhilosophy,Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress.
Vedral,V.(2010),DecodingReality,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Volkman,R.(2003),PrivacyasLife,Liberty,Property,EthicsandInformationTechnology,5(4):
199210.
(2005),DynamicTraditions:WhyGlobalizationDoesNotMeanHomogenization,in
ProceedingsofETHICOMP2005(CDROM),CenterforComputingandSocialResponsibility,
LinkpingsUniversity.
(2007),TheGoodComputerProfessionalDoesNotCheatatCards,inProceedingsof
ETHICOMP2007,Tokyo:MeijiUniversityPress.
Weckert,J.(2002),LilliputianComputerEthics,Metaphilosophy,33(3):366375.
(2005),TrustinCyberspace,inR.Cavalier(ed.),TheImpactoftheInternetonourMoral
Lives,Albany:SUNYPress,95117.
(2007),GivingandTakingOffenceinaGlobalContext,InternationalJournalofTechnology
andHumanInteraction,2535.

Weckert,J.andD.Adeney(1997),ComputerandInformationEthics,Westport,CT:Greenwood
Press.
Weizenbaum,J.(1976),ComputerPowerandHumanReason:FromJudgmenttoCalculation,San
Francisco,CA:Freeman.
Westin,A.(1967),PrivacyandFreedom,NewYork:Atheneum.
Wiener,N.(1948),Cybernetics:orControlandCommunicationintheAnimalandtheMachine,New
York:TechnologyPress/JohnWiley&Sons.
(1950),TheHumanUseofHumanBeings:CyberneticsandSociety,Boston:HoughtonMifflin
SecondEditionRevised,NewYork,NY:DoubledayAnchor1954.
(1964),God&Golem,Inc.:ACommentonCertainPointsWhereCyberneticsImpingeson
Religion,Cambridge,MA:MITPress.
Wolf.M.,K.MillerandF.Grodzinsky(2011),OntheMeaningofFreeSoftware,Ethicsand
InformationTechnology,11(4):279286.

AcademicTools
Howtocitethisentry.
PreviewthePDFversionofthisentryattheFriendsoftheSEPSociety.
LookupthisentrytopicattheIndianaPhilosophyOntologyProject(InPhO).
EnhancedbibliographyforthisentryatPhilPapers,withlinkstoitsdatabase.

OtherInternetResources
PapersandBooks
AVeryShortHistoryofComputerEthics,paperbyTerrellWardBynum(2000).
TeachingComputerEthics,bookeditedbyTerrellWardBynum,WalterManerandJonFodor
(1991).
WhatIsComputerEthics,apaperbyJamesH.Moor(1985).
WhySoftwareShouldBeFree,apaperbyRichardStallman(1991).

JournalsandWebSites
JournalofInformation,Communication&EthicsinSociety
TheETHICOMPJournal
CentreforComputingandSocialResponsibility
ElectronicFrontierFoundation
ElectronicPrivacyInformationCenter
EthicsandInformationTechnology
FreeSoftwareFoundation
InternationalCentreforInformationEthics
InternationalReviewofInformationEthics
JournalofInformationEthics
ResearchCenteronComputingandSociety
SoftwareEngineeringEthicsResearchInstitute

RelatedEntries
computing:andmoralresponsibility|informationtechnology:andmoralvalues|information
technology:andprivacy|informationtechnology:phenomenologicalapproachestoethicsand|

privacy|propertyandownership|socialnetworkingandethics
Copyright2015by
TerrellBynum<computerethics@mac.com>
OpenaccesstotheEncyclopediahasbeenmadepossible,inpart,withafinancialcontributionfrom
theAssociationofAcademicLibrariesintheNetherlands.Wegratefullyacknowledgethissupport.
TheSEPwouldliketocongratulatetheNationalEndowmentfortheHumanitiesonits50th
anniversaryandexpressourindebtednessforthefivegenerousgrantsitawardedourprojectfrom
1997to2007.ReaderswhohavebenefitedfromtheSEPareencouragedtoexaminetheNEHs
anniversarypageand,ifinspiredtodoso,sendatestimonialtoneh50@neh.gov.

TheStanfordEncyclopediaofPhilosophyiscopyright2015byTheMetaphysicsResearchLab,
CenterfortheStudyofLanguageandInformation(CSLI),StanfordUniversity
LibraryofCongressCatalogData:ISSN10955054