Ethics in Business Operations in Acne Inc - Report Example

Ethics in Business operations

Patent can be referred to as the recognition of an invention that satisfies the novelty of the globe and its industrial implications. Patents are basically ownership marks of the right or rather the owner of an invention. They are given as either a protection to a product or a process that someone has invented. Businesses are controlled by specific legal requirements that define the dos and don’ts of a business. It is therefore essential for current and future business entrepreneurs and leaders to understand the role of legal risk and the law in shaping the decisions made within the business. Legal issues within a business can be studied to trace common law development and at the same time illustrate real business problems that professionals encounter. This paper shall, on plight of this, discuss the ethical dilemma surrounding the issue of Acme, Inc. in accordance with the course objectives. The paper shall further identify the intellectual property consequences of the situation and deliberate on alternative dispute resolutions that can be used.

In the scenario of Acne Inc. and Beta Inc. there is bridging of the patent in that, Acne Inc. has already acquired the patent on a certain drug that will provide immortality to all, but then Beta Inc. copies the patent and introduces the drug in market (Miller, 2010, p. 18). Acquisition of the patent by Acne prohibits Beta Inc. from using or selling the same drug. On the other hand, Beta Inc. is not offensive in that Acne Inc. has declared in the public domain that it has no intentions of marketing or selling the drug patented anytime soon. In summary there is use of intellectual property which has already been licensed to someone else which is a bridge. In this scenario Beta Inc. is required to acquire a market authorization from Acne Inc.

Alternative dispute resolution is a method used by conflicting individuals or corporates outside a courtroom. It is sensible, less costing means of litigation that can be used in this scenario of intellectual property between Acne Inc and Beta Inc. Generally there are very few rules governing the alternative dispute resolution which in this scenario is deemed best solution. Whenever the alternative dispute resolution is used, the intended costs are met. This however normally increases the time used in litigation, energy and money (Kanopy (Firm), 2014, p. 28). In the process of alternative dispute resolution, the arbitrators end up replicating the damages and the contractual limits. Some alternative dispute resolutions that can be applicable in this scenario are negotiation and mediation. Negotiation should be attempted first since it shall give the parties an opportunity to meet and allow the parties to control the process of solution. Should this method fail, mediation can be chosen in which a mediator is used to bring the parties together and help solve the dispute.

Most of the trades conducted in the world are carried out in relation to the trade agreements which entail substantial and unified limited use of the intellectual property rights. In this scenario the two companies find them in a tight situation. Acne inc has been issued with the patent on a certain immortality drug. Its president has however gone to the public domain and said the company has no plans to market the product in the near future. This means if the product was on demand there could have been a state of monopoly (Fox, 2008, p. 58). However on the hand, Beta Inc. Company has decided to market the product at no profit but without the full rights of market authorization. It has thus violated the intellectual property rights which are solely deemed to be enjoyed by Acne Inc. in summary of the above, the two companies finds themselves in that dilemma.

This case scenario can be extensively discussed in relation to the ethical theories that are perceived in the specification and morality and justification of the moral rules and ethical principles. These ethical theories are; Utilitarianism and deontological ethics theory. Consequentialism is at times is what is referred to as utilitarianism. This was a theory that was authored and developed in the corporate world by j. Bentham and J. Stuart Mill.

It is believed that there are several varieties of Utilitarianism in the modern world. It is however basically means the moral act is null and void. Simply means no moral act, For instance the act of stealing. On the other thought it can be taken as a rule. In brief summary, according to the Utilitarianism theory, morality was more of immoral production of goods resulting from the moral actions and the good. In the modern world moral duty is instrumental and not intrinsic. In the scenario of the two companies, Acne and Beta, this theory can be used to explain the dilemma they both find them in. For Beta Inc. it was an act of non-moral good to violate the intellectual property rules by using the patent which had already been licensed. This however on a closer look at it, it is an immoral good but aimed at achieving moral good to the whole society. Yes, Acne Inc had the intellectual rights of ownership the immortality drug but it was not ready and willing to sell it the market. It had sold this drug it would have been better because definitely a life would have been saved.

It was immoral for Beta Inc to market the product that had already been patented but now under this theory it was of moral benefit to many. Since this drug was very important to the people and the rightful owner was not willing to sell to them, the emergence of Beta Inc probably saved the situation. Considering this theory as a rule in reference to the the scenario of Acne Beta, since Acne had acquired the license of the patent, the intellectual rules would not allow Beta to market the drug. This has not been observed however in the scenario because Beta acted objective to satisfy individuals’ desires by breaking the rule to market the drug. The Utilitarianism theory has however been found defective by most philosophers and theologians. They argued solely on the fact that, when Utilitarianism once adopted it justifies the appropriate things that are immoral in nature.

As seen from the defective measures of Utilitarianism theory by most of the philosophers and theologians, most of the thinkers have thus resulted in seconding another theory called Deontological ethical theory. This theory is believed to have originated from a Greek word which simply means “to bind together”. This theory simply means adhering to the scripts, natural moral intuitions and law from common logic ("Patents and Standards in the US," n.d., p. 08). Deontological theory can be distinguished in three features. The first is duty. In this feature, the theory seeks to elucidate that duty ought to be done for duties sake. It also features the second characteristic as the correctness or wrongness of an action or rules all the same. It is also concerned with the issue of inherent structures of that action or rule. For instance, the acts of dishonest, breaking promises and manslaughter are perceived intrinsically incorrect. Arguably therefore, we have a moral obligation not to perform such acts.

Using the Deontological theory to explain the scenario of Acne Inc and Beta Inc, we agree with Beta Inc because, it has arguably acted in duty’s sake. The action of it marketing the drug had a moral duty to save a life. Beta Inc also can be taken to have acted in intrinsic moral value. They opted to market the drug for the general welfare of everyone even though they had no patent ownership. Lastly Beta Inc acted imperatively for universality. The patented drug was important and vital remedy to mortality for all. This could be the reason as why they were not making any profit from the sales.