Abstract
The sociotechnical system of a robot, including its software, matters. Context is central to analyzing the ethical implications of that software for the public and the ethical responsibilities of the developers of that software. Possibly morally neutral concepts such as mass production, information storage, information acquisition, connectivity, ownership and learning can have a collective positive or negative ethical impact for a world with robots. Since robots are a type of artificial agent (AA), we start with a claim by Floridi that the actions of AAs can be sources of moral or immoral actions. Because AAs are in essence multi-agent systems, we apply Floridi’s Distributed Morality (DM). In this paper, we will analyze proprietary and open source licensing schemes as a policy component of DM and show the distinctions between software licensing schemes in terms of how they work to “aggregate good actions” and “fragment evil actions” for the uses and features of robots now and in the future. We also argue that open source licensing schemes are more appropriate than proprietary software licenses for robot software that incorporates the results from automated learning algorithms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Floridi, L. (2013a). The ethics of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Floridi, L. (2013b). Distributed morality in an information society. Science and Engineering Ethics, 19, 727–743.
Grodzinsky, F. S., Miller, K. W., & Wolf, M. J., (2014). Developing automated deceptions and the impact on trust. Philosophy and Technology. doi:10.1007/s13347-014-0158-7.
Kravets, D. (2014). Monkey’s selfie at center of copyright brouhaha. Ars Technica. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/08/monkeys-selfie-at-center-of-copyright-brouhaha/. Accessed 11 Aug 2014.
Merolla, P. A., Arthur, J. V., Alvarez-Icaza, R., Cassidy, A. S., Sawada, J., Akopyan, F., Jackson, B. L., Imam, N., Guo, C., Nakamura, Y., Brezzo, B., Vo, I., Esser, S. K., Appuswamy, R., Taba, B., Amir, A., Flickner, M. D., Risk, W. P., Manohar, R., & Modha, D. S. (2014, August 8). A million spiking-neuron integrated circuit with a scalable communication network and interface. Science, 345(6197): 668–673. Epub 2014 Aug 7. Accessed 11 Aug 2014.
Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together. New York: Basic Books.
UL. (2014). About UL. http://ul.com/aboutul. Accessed 10 Aug 2014.
Wang, H. F., & Shen, S. Y. (1989). Group decision support with MOLP applications. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 19(1), 143–153.
Wolf, M. J., Miller, K., & Grodzinsky, F. S. (2009). Free, source-code-available, or proprietary: An ethically charged, context-sensitive choice. ACM SIGCAS, 39, 15–26.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wolf, M.J., Grodzinsky, F., Miller, K.W. (2016). Robots, Ethics and Software – FOSS vs. Proprietary Licenses. In: Müller, V.C. (eds) Computing and Philosophy. Synthese Library, vol 375. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23291-1_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23291-1_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-23290-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-23291-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)