Ethical Issues of Information Technology - Essay Example

work] Ethical Issues of Information Technology Exactly two decades ago, Richard Mason (1986) had d four ethical issues of the information age which were privacy, accuracy, property, and accessibility. The questions ran simpler this way - What secrets can people keep and not be forced to reveal to others Who is held accountable for the authenticity and truth of information Who are considered owners of information What information does anyone have a right or a privilege to obtain (Mason, 1986). The explosive development of communications technology, however, brings into view challenges of new legal and ethical situations in the fight between individual rights and societal needs, rendering the questions more complex. For instance, should cracking into a computer system be viewed as simple prank, trespassing, theft, or espionage What about placing copyrighted material onto a public file server Is this freedom of expression or theft Should ordinary communications be coded to make it impossible for law-enforcement agencies to perform wire-taps (Information systems, 2007). Computers are special technology that raises special ethical issues (Moor, 1991) and that such issues and problems are unique to the field. They would not have been issues had it not been for the technology itself (Maner, 1996). Ethical issues of information technology are called many names like computer ethics, information ethics, and cyberethics. In the whole of information systems management, whatever its name, the new technology radically reshapes life styles, at the same time creates challenges in the areas of privacy, property, security and individual identity (Information systems, 2007). The following discussion covers issues in consumer or online privacy, copyright, patents, trademarks, trade secrets, legal jurisdiction, and online contracting that manifest in the field of information technology. The details come in the form of definitions and philosophical reflections or historical events elucidating the issue. The paper then ends with a note on probabilities for the future. Computer and information technology may be used interchangeably throughout the paper and may mean the same. The Ethical Issues Online Privacy. The cheap, fast, painless encryption technology provided by the computer has transformed the privacy debate completely. While before, people worried about the wearing away of privacy, the concern now is about the computer-generated privacy "afforded to every criminal with a computer and half a brain." (Maner, 1996). Electronic mail has replaced telephone and inter-office mail communications as the principal medium of business communications and this has made work easier. Throughout it all, however, suddenly, one's email address has become known to merchandisers and one begins receiving a lot of unsolicited email daily about products being advertised. Identity theft generally involves obtaining data from individual consumers' financial transactions on the Internet or elsewhere, and either billing the consumers' credit cards for nonexistent transactions or services, or using consumers' personal data to conduct actual transactions that are billed to the consumers(Internet Fraud, 2000). Identity theft is an Internet fraud. There is a need for email privacy in the workplace and the blocking of bulk E-mail solicitations called "SPAM." How had the address been known to others The sale of personal information, or its use by a successor, according to Zaharoff (2001) may constitute "unfair or deceptive" act even if it is not a breach of contract. The Computer-Processed Personal Data Protection Act was passed in 1995, governing official agency as well as non-official agency (Yang & Chang, 2007). At present, however, the only eight categories of non-official agency governed by it are credit information, hospital, school, telecommunications, financing and banking, securities, insurance and mass communications (Yang & Chang, 2007). This means these agencies having to do with these concerns must apply for licenses to collect personal data and process them by computer. In principle, the collection, processing and utilization of personal data must serve a specific purpose, and the written consent of the person concerned or a contract with him or her is necessary (Yang & Chang, 2007). Interventions. Closely connected to consumer privacy is interference. There are those who are called "black hat" hackers who use their skills to break into systems and access data and programs without the permission of the owners (Ethical issues, 2007). The Internet has fared no better than other technologies against resourceful and technologically sophisticated individuals who seek to commit unlawful acts (The electronic, 2000). By the end of 1999, for example, tens of thousands of computer users were struck by "Melissa" and "Explore.Zip.Worm," e-mail viruses that quickly spread around the world, erasing files, crashing systems, and costing companies millions of dollars in support and downtime (The electronic, 2000). More recently, some of the most popular consumer websites were temporarily disabled as a result of "distributed denial-of-service" attacks. Other websites have been the targets of "page-jacking" schemes, in which websites and search engines are manipulated to drive unsuspecting users to unwanted (usually "adult") websites (The electronic, 2000). Page-Jacking.Page-jacking involves the appropriation of website descriptions, key words, or meta-tags from other sites (Internet Fraud, 2000). As described, the page-jacker inserts these items into his own site, seeking to draw consumers to a particular site. This is because the descriptions, key words, and meta-tags are used by search engines when sorting and displaying sites on a topic requested by an individual. When the sites appear for that topic, an individual might see two or three descriptions appearing to be the same site. If he happens to click on one of the duplicated descriptions, he or she will be directed to the bogus site, which often is a pornographic site. To make matters worse, page-jackers often "mouse-trap" a user's browser so that attempts to close the browser's windows or to use the "back" or "forward" button will simply direct the user to another pornographic site (Internet Fraud, 2000) Copyright. Copyright laws protect the exclusive rights of the author or owner of a copyright to print, publish and sell the subject of the copyright (Johnson, 2001). These exclusive rights are subject to "fair use" and public domain. The Copyright Act applies to online information and transactions; therefore, advisably, companies with web sites should attach copyright notices to their works (Johnson, 2001). Further, literary and musical works transmitted on the Internet are addressed by the international protection of copyright law as treaties. Three legal mechanisms to claim ownership include patent, trade secrecy, as well as copyright (Johnson, 2001). Related to these are the concepts of algorithms, source code, object code which must be distinguished from each other as the Intellectual property laws treat these differently. There are also limitations on what can be owned or claimed in both copyright and patent laws. A question that arises is: Why not give ownership of software to the original creator or publisher There are many issues that fall under copyright. For example, copyrighting and patenting constrain software development, because a company has to do an extensive search to find out what is already claimed. Whether found or not, they still need to spend a lot of effort or money. For example, with software, other aspects that could be "owned" are the "Look and feel" of user interfaces (Johnson, 2001). This creates a barrier to innovation, slows down the process, and increases the costs. The problem is that with copyright, expressions of ideas can be owned but not the ideas themselves. However, "algorithm" is an idea; "code" is an expression. Hence, distinction between idea and expression does not seem suitable for software (Johnson, 2001). With copyright, registering is not required and protection is granted for a time period. Generally, software is protected by copyright laws where not anybody can just copy, distribute, or perform without permission from the author called copyright holder. Determining when a copyright has been infringed is a contentious issue, however (Johnson, 2001). One must prove "striking resemblance." Copyright also does not give monopoly of control. If something is created independently, there is no infringement. In Apple vs. Franklin (US Supreme Court, 1984), it was established that object code (machine readable code) is counted as an "expression." It is then wise for organizations that contract for website designs to watch out as the creator of one's website may claim ownership to the site. In contracts, therefore, specifics in the contract should highlight what the job involves and what it means (Johnson, 2001). Copyright piracy. The advent of powerful and inexpensive computing is bringing many changes in the way that copyrighted works are being illegally distributed, and hence to the methods that law enforcement uses to combat copyright piracy. Traditionally, copyrighted works such as books, records, and audiotapes; and counterfeit trademarked goods have been illegally reproduced. The copyrighted works or counterfeit goods are sold to wholesalers, and then to retailers, who in turn sell them on the street (SIIA Anti-piracy, 2005). In this type of distribution scheme, the damage to copyright owners or trademark holders, while substantial, is subject to certain technological limits. That is because the equipment necessary to reproduce the works or goods in bulk is relatively expensive, and because second-generation products or "copies of copies," are either impossible for the customer to make (for records and compact discs) or suffer in quality (for audio and video cassettes) (Software piracy, 2000). This illegal distribution of copyrighted works in the offline world continues to present a pressing problem for copyright owners, particularly for producers of books, movies, music, and computer software. Accordingly, law enforcement continues to focus attention on investigating and prosecuting offline copyright pirates. To a fast-changing degree, however, copyright piracy is being carried out through computers. Anything capable of being digitized is capable of being transmitted easily from one computer to another(SIIA Anti-piracy, 2005). Pirates have used this capability of the computer to steal vast amounts of copyrighted material and to transfer it illegally to others. So far, computer software companies appear to have suffered the most at the hands of these new intellectual property pirates (SIIA Anti-piracy, 2005). The proliferation of Internet piracy exposes the consumer to an increased risk of computer viruses and fraudulent software sales, weakens the software industry's ability to generate economic growth, and facilitates a host of other criminal activities (Software piracy, 2000). Software is one of the most valuable technologies of the Information Age, running everything from PCs to the Internet. Yet, because software has become such an important productivity tool, the illegal copying and distribution of it persists globally. In fact, in the United States, one in four software programs is unlicensed (BSA, 2007). Patent. The patent aims to protect inventions or things and processes that produce things, and thereby foster inventions. It ensures that inventors reap rewards for their inventions. Under patent laws, implementations of ideas can be owned; however, abstract ideas, mathematical algorithms, mental steps or laws of nature cannot be owned. What can be patented could be certain business practices implemented in software. An example of this is the "one click purchasing" by amazon.com (Johnson, 2001) Patents are a solution to the problem of trade secrets. In essence, patents are a bribe to inventors: To obtain a 20-year government monopoly on the use of their inventions, they must disclose the details to the public. Patents create an artificial scarcity so that markets can generate prices that both encourage production of new inventions and allocate them to consumers (Bailey, 2002). For software, the patent is the strongest form of protection as it gives the inventor a monopoly on use of invention. A patent is actually a legitimate monopoly, even if someone invents the same independently. Evidence of any prior use, however, could invalidate a patent (Johnson, 2001). The courts have been reluctant to grant patent for software on two counts: 1) Ownership of mental processes might be granted; and 2) Ownership of algorithms ("permissible subject matter"). Nevertheless, after a court case in Diamond vs. Diehr (US Supreme Court, 1981), thousands of patents have been granted for software in the US. Now, more than 20,000 software patents are awarded annually. Some, however, argue strongly against patenting software. As it is, the patent process can be very long and expensive (Johnson, 2001). Reverse engineering. Reverse engineering is generally defined as examining a completed product with the intent of understanding the technology and process used in its design, manufacture, or operation. (Article #193, 2005). Quite often, reverse engineering requires disassembly or destruction of the item. Is this practice ethical The serious legal issue of patent infringement only arises if one chooses to adopt protected information or process something as one's own. Seeking counsel from legal services is very important then in situations such as this. Reverse engineering can be accomplished in an acceptable manner, but there are risks (Article #193, 2005). Trade Secrets. In the Hi-Tech sector, the value of a company is based on its trade secrets and intellectual property. Protecting trade secrets relies on the good will of the employees, but in today's competitive market, companies find that relying on an employee's sense of loyalty may not enough to protect its vital trade secrets (Fine, 2001). One common method to ensure that trade secrets are not shared with competitors is through the use of Covenants Not to Compete, also known as Non-Compete Clauses. By signing a covenant not to compete, the employee promises that if he leaves the company, he will not go to work for a direct competitor (Fine, 2001). The more valuable the information, the more likely the agreement is to be enforced by the courts. On the other hand, the court will not enforce the agreement if the employee can demonstrate that he kept the information confidential (Galvin, 2007). These excessive restrictions on an employee's ability to choose his place of work make this an emotionally charged topic (Fine, 2001). Covenants not to compete are written to protect the company, but it is feared that they could be used to unfairly restrict the ability of people to find employment. To prevent this, courts across the world have said that in order to be legal, covenants not to compete must meet the requirement of Reasonability. Courts judge if a covenant is reasonable by asking: Are the limitations established in the contract reasonably necessary in order to achieve the stated objective of protecting trade secrets (Fine, 2001). The courts balance the reasonable needs of the former employer against concern for the right of the employee to earn a living. They also take into consideration the public's interest in not enforcing these agreements if they interfere with ordinary, healthy competition (Galvin, 2007). Reasonability is proven on two main characteristics: time and location. Covenants not to compete state that an employee cannot work for a competitor for a set amount of time. Due to the dynamic pace of the Hi-Tech industry, this is typically one and a half years. Covenants not to compete also state that a former employee cannot work for a competitor in a certain geographic area. In the non Hi-Tech world, this is typically an area of 3-5 miles from the company. However in the Hi-Tech world, as companies compete as much with those next door as those across the world, these restrictions are often irrelevant and non-existent (Fine, 2001). Covenants Not to Compete. Laws give companies the right to keep certain information secret for purposes of keeping their competitive edge. These are not registered and they remain valid indefinitely. Generally, it is not illegal to discover a trade secret by reverse engineering (Johnson, 2001). The methods used by software companies to protect their trade secrets usually constitute nondisclosure clauses in employment contracts, and licensing agreements with customers. Nondisclosure clauses are the same as those discussed earlier by Fine (2001) as Covenants Not to Compete, or Non-Compete Clauses. For a trade secret to hold up in a court, the following elements must be present: novelty; representing an economic investment to claimant; some effort in the development involved; protection of the secret with some effort by the claimant, developers use technical ways and limitation of what is available to users, and identifying codes built into the software (Johnson, 2001). The problems for software, however, include that enforcing nondisclosure agreements are tricky and difficult. Moreover, trade secrecy laws are not designed for IT; and that often, a company has to reveal the secret in order to sell it, for example providing source code of modifiable software to a licensing customer (Johnson, 2001). Trademarks. Unlike copyrights or patents, trademark rights can last indefinitely if the owner continues to use the mark to identify its goods or services. The term of a federal trademark registration is 10 years, with 10-year renewal terms. However, between the fifth and sixth year after the date of initial registration, the registrant must file an affidavit setting forth certain information to keep the registration alive. If no affidavit is filed, the registration is cancelled. (Hubert, 2007). Any trademark infringement can confuse the public to the owner's detriment. The electronic use of "domain names" in relation to trademark law, and "linking", "framing", and "meta-tags" are possible electronic trademark infringements. Trademarks protect names, symbols, and icons. They are generally valid indefinitely as long as they are being used. The aim is to prevent confusion among consumers. In e-business, the relevance is found in domain name registration where "cybersquatters" have early successes, but become illegal later (Johnson, 2001). Users are advised that any unauthorized down loading, retransmission or other copying or modification of trade-marks and/or the contents of websites may be a violation of federal and/or common law trade-mark and/or copyright laws (Feldcamp, 2007). Certain words or designs found at websites may also constitute trade names, trade marks or service marks of an organization or of other entities used under license. Likewise, the display of trade-marks at any website does not necessarily imply that a license of any kind has been granted. (Feldcamp, 2007). Legal Jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is the authority given by law to a court to try cases and rule on legal matters within a particular geographic area and/or over certain types of legal cases. Before a lawsuit is filed, it is vital to determine which court has jurisdiction. State courts have jurisdiction over matters within that state, and different levels of courts have jurisdiction over lawsuits involving different amounts of money. (Hill & Hill, 2005). Laws are written for jurisdictions with clear geographic boundaries. The question is: How do laws apply in "cyberspace" Gambling, for example is legal in some localities but mostly illegal in others. What about pornography, fraud, defamation, terrorism. Generally, legal cases or courts create laws by establishing precedence (John son, 2001). As far as jurisdiction is concerned, one should prepare to be sued wherever one's client actively promotes its products and services or conducts business (Zaharoff, 2001). Jurisdiction in cyberspace is categorized into two: personal and internet. Advertising and selling on the Web may subject a company to personal jurisdiction in every state in which the Web site is accessible. Outside of personal jurisdiction is that of the non-resident defendant, the Internet jurisdiction (Zaharoff, 2001). In order for any government agency, subsidiary or law to be applied to an individual citizen, it must be first proved or assumed that the government has jurisdiction in this matter over that particular individual for that time. Specifically, before an individual can be charged and convicted with a crime, the government official or agency must prove jurisdiction. This is seldom accomplished, and many individuals lose a case and even go to jail when no one has proved this legally essential issue (Seven elements, 2007). With no jurisdiction comes no case and no conviction! But to win, jurisdiction must be challenged by the individual, and if challenged successfully, the case is dismissed (Seven elements, 2007). Online Contracting. In the traditional world, a contract is concluded when both parties put their pens to the signature section of a physical document which sets out the agreed terms. A contract may be concluded orally but if either party subsequently denies the existence of the contract, there are often a lot of evidential problems in establishing that the agreement actually did come into place (Halberstam, 2004). A contract is a voluntary exchange between two parties, who have mutually agreed to terms. Contracts need not be in writing or signed, and these include "Shrink-wrap licenses" or agreeing to terms of software by opening packet and "Click-wrap agreements" or agreeing by "clicking" buttons on a screen (Johnson, 2001). Before the impact of the Internet on the contractual process is considered, it is necessary to consider the legal components which enable a contract to come into existence. There are four such elements: consideration, the intention to create legal relations, offer, and acceptance. (Halberstam, 2004). The concept of consideration means that each party should derive something beneficial from the transaction. The second element, namely the intention to create legal relations may be understood to exist by virtue of the fact that the parties are in negotiations. With the advent of the online world, the law of contract has not altered; rather it has had to apply the existing concepts to a new medium. There are two mainstream ways of concluding a contract online. (Halberstam, 2004). Contract conclusion via emails. The first is by way of exchange of emails. This is similar to the exchange of physical correspondence. As long as the email of acceptance does not vary the terms set out in the email of offer, a contract will be concluded by the second email. However, questions can arise as to when the acceptance is valid. This is especially so when there is a limited supply. Halberstam (2004) asks - For example, what happens if a computer company has a total of 5 PCs to sell and sends out emails to all of its clients on 2nd January notifying them of the PCs and their price If 6 of the company's customers send emails of acceptance on 3rd January, which customer loses out Halberstam's (2004) analysis - In the offline world, to cover the equivalent situation, the first letter to be posted is the one which is deemed to be the successful acceptance even if it happens to arrive on the desk of the offeror after the other letter has already arrived. In the online world, it has not yet been unequivocally determined as to what constitutes the equivalent of posting in a letter box - is it the moment of transmission of the email, the moment it arrives in the addressee's inbox or the moment that the addressee opens that email The particular circumstances will usually dictate the answer. To avoid doubt, therefore, the company should specify in its terms and conditions how, in the event of competing emails of acceptance, it will determine which email has been deemed to arrive first. (Halberstam, 2004). Contract conclusion via website. The other method of concluding an online contract is via a website when one goes onto a website, select certain items and proceeds to the checkout. The issue as to whether the display of certain items on a website constitutes an offer of invitation to treat or offer is relevant to the website environment. In order for a company to run a proper e-commerce operation, it needs to ensure that its terms and conditions are property adapted to the online environment, that potential clients have sight of the terms and conditions which will govern the contract before conclusion of the contract is made. The acceptance will generally be by way of a click on the word "accept". "Clickwrap" acceptance has now been granted similar status to the offline signature although, understandably, evidentially, the former is still preferable (Halberstam, 2004). CONCLUSION Covering all of these issues is Intellectual Property Law which is at the core of Internet Law that has to do with copyrights, trademarks patents, trade secrets, and the like. However the law of the Internet touches upon a broad array of legal issues, covering nearly the entire legal landscape, including: domain name disputes, piracy of works, privacy and security of information, online defamation, First Amendment rights, pornography, enforceability of e-signatures, personal jurisdiction, contract law and click-through agreements, interference with and unlawful access to computer systems and criminal law. Generally, the substantive federal laws governing theft of intellectual property on the Internet are adequate (NYSBA, 2003). The ease with which offenders can duplicate and distribute protected works on the Internet, however, has raised investigatory challenges for law enforcement. To address these challenges, there need to be, among other things, improved technologies to find the distributors, investigators trained to use those tools, and effective international agreements to bring the offenders to justice. In addition, the current Sentencing Guidelines pertaining to intellectual property offenses do not provide adequate sentences and have resulted in law enforcement agencies and prosecutors being reluctant to commit scarce resources to investigating and prosecuting criminal intellectual property cases (NYSBA, 2003). Most ethical issues that IT and security professionals confront have not been codified into law, nor is there a standard mandatory oversight body (such as the national or state medical association or bar association) that has established a detailed code of ethics (Ethical issues, 2007). However, the question of ethical behavior in the IT professions is beginning to be addressed. Voluntary professional associations such as the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) have developed their own codes of ethics and professional conduct, which can serve as a guideline for individuals and other organizations to follow (Ethical issues, 2007). References Article #193: Benchmarking and Reverse Texas Instruments. Engineering. Onlineethics.org. Last modified on July 21, 2005. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://onlineethics.org/corp/bench.html Bailey, R. Patent Absurdity. Reason Magazine. October 23, 2002. Business Software Alliance (BSA). Anti-Piracy Information. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.bsa.org/usa/antipiracy/ Diamond, R. & Dragich, M. Professionalism in Librarianship: Shifting the Focus from Malpractice to Good Practice. In Wengert, R.G. (ed). Ethical Issues in Information Technology. Library trends. 49(3), Winter 2001. Ethical Issues for IT Security Professionals. Retrieved February 20, 2007. WindowsSecurity. comhttp://www.windowsecurity.com/articles/Ethical-Issues-IT-Security-Professionals.html Feldcamp, V. Trade-marks & Copyright. Credit Union Central of Canada. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://www.cucentral.ca/trademark Fine, R. Covenants not to compete. Values for Management. February 2001. Center for Business Ethics and social Responsibility. Galvin, W. F. Covenants not to compete. Citizen Information Service. Retrieved February 21, 2007, from http://www.sec.state.ma.us/cis/ciscov/covidx.htm Halberstam, S. How to contract online. Retrieved February 2007, from http://www.weblaw.co.uk/art_contract_online.php Hill, G.N. & Hill, K.T. (2005). Jurisdiction. Retrieved February 20, 2007, from http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/jurisdiction Hubert, M.S. Patents, trademarks and copyrights. Trademark theory. http://www.patentortrademark.com/trademark_theory.php Information systems ethics. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://cyberethics.cbi.msstate.edu/ Internet fraud. Working group on unlawful conduct on the Internet. Appendix B. Last updated March 9, 2000. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/append.htm Johnson, D. G. (2001). Computer Ethics. ISBN-10: 0130836990. ISBN-13: 978-0130836991. Prentice Hall; 3rd edition Litt, R. S. Statement of Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Criminal Division. United States Department of Justice before the Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information. Senate Judiciary Committee. United States Senate. Washington, D.C. March 19, 1997. Updated page July 19, 1999 usdoj-crm/mis/mdf. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/sentechtest.htm Maner, W. Starter kit in computer ethics. Helvetica Press and the National Information and Resource Center for the Teaching of Philosophy, 1980. Maner, W. Unique ethical problems in information technology. Science and Engineering Ethics, Volume 2, Number 2 (April, 1996), pages 137-154. Mason, R. O. Four Ethical Issues of the Information Age. Management Information Systems Quarterly. Volume 10, Number 1, March, 1986. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.misq.org/archivist/vol/no10/issue1/vol10no1mason.html Moor, J. What is computer ethics In Metaphilosophy 16, 4 (1985), p. 266. Moor, J. What is computer ethics In Teaching Computer Ethics, Bynum, T., Maner, W., and Fodor, J., (eds). Research Center on Computing and Society, New Haven, Connecticut, 1991. New York State Bar Association (NYSBA). Copyright, Trademark, Trade Secret, Patent & Internet Law. Intellectual property. New York State Bar Association. nysba.org. October 2003. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.nysba.org/Content/ContentGroups/News1/Legal_Ease_Pamphlet_Series/Intellectual_Property2/IP.Copyright.Trademark.pdf Rusch, J. (Special Counsel for fraud prevention. Fraud section of the Criminal Division). The Rising Tide of Internet Fraud. USA Bulletin (May 2001). SIIA Anti-piracy. Report, software piracy. 2005 year in review. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.siia.net/piracy/PR2005.pdf Software piracy and intellectual property theft. Working group on unlawful conduct on the Internet. Appendix I. Last updated March 9, 2000. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/append.htm Study Guide: Legal and ethical aspects of the Internet. Tek.xam.com. Retrieved February 18, 2007, from http://www.tekxam.com/StudyGuide/concepts/Ethics-and-Legal/TekXam_Legal_and_Ethical_Study_Guide.html The electronic frontier: The challenge of unlawful conduct involving the use of the Internet. A Report of the President's Working Group on Unlawful Conduct on the Internet. March 2000. Last updated July 19, 2004. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/unlawful.htm Yang, D. & Chang, H.H. E-com legal guide. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from www.apectelwg.org/admin/document/documents/e-com/taipeiapec.doc Zaharoff, H. G. "E-Commerce Basics," e-Commerce business law. Morse Barnes-Brown Pendleton. July 24, 2001. Retrieved February 19, 2007, from http://www.mbbp.com/resources/business/e-commerce.html Read More