Ethics

Wexler v. Greenberg and Associated Press v. International News Service are two of the cases that exhibit questions with regard to trade secrets and conflict of interests between employers and employees or competitors. The decisions made by the court in each of these cases are subjected to ethical questions in consideration of the basis for each case. In Wexler v. Greenberg, the decision of the court maximizes utility and is in favor of the moral framework for deontology. On the other hand, the case of Associated Press v. International News Service shows that it also brings happiness to a greater number and is also not accepted in consequentialism.

In Wexler v. Greenberg, the court took the side of the employee and rules that the use of the formulas in the new company does not involve any violation of trade secret. The availability of innovative techniques, which includes the formula made by Greenberg, gives the society the maximum utility because of the benefit derived from the available inventions. Where the goal of inventions is to improve work processes, the members of the society who purchases the inventions benefit from the purpose of the invention. Likewise, it is the duty of Greenberg, as a chemist to continue doing his task, as mentioned in the decision of his court, that entails the use of his technical knowledge and contribute to the organization that pays for his labor.

As for the case of Associated Press v. International News Service, the court ruled that the news gathering method employed by the International News Service is unobjectionable. The news is not a property of any media organization and the availability of other newspapers that carry relevant information, regardless of whether it is the same as with the others, allows for a greater circulation of knowledge within the society. In such a case, International News Service is able to bring the maximum utility as there is an increase in the access to information. However, the decision of the court is unethical when taken from the standpoint of consequentialism. The intention of International News Service is to profit from the hard work of Associated Press. When ones intention is to take advantage of another persons or entity, even if there is no harm intended or produced, the act is considered to be immoral and wrongful ( Consequentialism,  2006) . Thus, the decision of the case is immoral when taken from the consequentialism standpoint but is rightful when taken from the utilitarian perspective.