4.

4 Line-Drawing 83

CASE: Steve Severson

THIRTY-FOUR-YEAR -OLD STEV EN SEVER SON was in his last
semester of his graduate program in mechanical engineering. Father of three
small children, he was anxious to get his degree so that he could spend more
time with his family. Going to school and holding down a full-time job not
only kept him from his family but also shifted more parental responsibility to
his wife Sarah than he believed was fair. But the end was in sight, and he
could look forward both to a better job and to being a better father and
husband.
Steven was following in the footsteps of his father, who received a
graduate degree in mechanical engineering just months before tragically dying

F
in an automobile accident. Sarah understood how important getting a
graduate degree was to Steven, and she never complained about the long
hours he spent studying. But she, too, was anxious for this chapter in their
lives to end.
As part of his requirement to complete his graduate research and obtain
his advanced degree, Steven was required to develop a research report. Most
of the data strongly supported Steven’s conclusions as well as prior
conclusions developed by others. However, a few aspects of the data were at
variance and not fully consistent with the conclusions contained in his report.
LS
Convinced of the soundness of his report and concerned that inclusion of
the ambiguous data would detract from and distort the essential thrust of
the report, Steven wondered if it would be all right to omit references to the
ambiguous data.
It seems clear why Steven is tempted to omit references to the ambiguous
data. He is understandably anxious to graduate and move on to other
challenges in his professional life. He is worried that full disclosure of his
findings could slow down this process, a process that has imposed a heavy
burden on his family. However, his question is whether it would be right to
omit reference to the data.
The ethical analysis of a situation begins with two questions: What are the
relevant facts? and What are the relevant kinds of ethical considerations that
should be brought to bear on the situation? We also suggested that the first
question cannot be answered independently of the second. Psychologically
speaking, Steven is tempted, for evident reasons. Ethically speaking, should
he do it? To answer this second question, we need to try to clarify what is at
 4.4 Line-Drawing 84

stake ethically, not just psychologically.

CASE: Tom
Case 1. Tom is a young engineering graduate who designs
automobile brakes for Ford. While working for Ford, he learns a
lot of common scientific information about heat transfer and
materials. After 5 years, Tom leaves Ford to take a job at General
Motors. While at General Motors, Tom applies his knowledge of
heat transfer and materials to design engines.

F
Is Tom stealing Ford’s intellectual property? (See Table 6.1.)

TABLE 6.1 (Case 1)

Feature

Generic Information
Different Application
Information Protected as a Trade Secret
Positive

Yes
Yes
No
Test Case

X———————
X———————
X———————
Negative

No
No
Yes
LS
Case 2. Tom is a young engineering graduate who designs
automobile brakes for Ford. While working for the company, he
learns a lot about heat transfer and materials. After 5 years, Tom
leaves Ford to take a job at General Motors. While at General Motors,
Tom applies his knowledge of heat transfer and materials to design
brakes.

Is Tom stealing Ford’s intellectual property? (See Table 6.2.)

 4.4 Line-Drawing 85

TABLE 6.2 (Case 2)

Feature Positive Test Case Negative

Generic Information Yes X——————— No

Different Application Yes ———————X No
Information Protected as a Trade Secret No X——————— Yes

Case 3. Tom is a young engineering graduate who designs

automobile brakes for Ford. While working for Ford, Tom helps
develop a new brake lining that lasts twice as long as conventional
brake linings. Ford decides to keep the formula for this brake lining
as a trade secret. After 5 years, Tom leaves Ford to take a job at

F
General Motors. While at General Motors, Tom tells the company
the formula for the new brake lining.
Is Tom stealing Ford’s intellectual property? (See Table 6.3.)

TABLE 6.3 (Case 3)

Feature

Generic Information
Positive

Yes
Test Case

———————X
Negative

No
LS
Different Application Yes ———————X No
Information Protected as a Trade Secret No ———————X Yes

In Case 1, Tom has not stolen Ford’s intellectual property. Although it is true
that he used generic scientific knowledge acquired while he was at Ford, the
information is available to anyone. The application of the generic scientific
knowledge is markedly different at General Motors. But because General
Motors and Ford both compete in the same market sector and brakes and motors
are both parts of automobiles, the ‘‘X’’ does appear at the extreme left of the
spectrum. In Case 2, Tom applies his knowledge to the same area, brake
design, but the knowledge is still generic scientific knowledge over which Ford
has no claim, even if Tom acquired this knowledge while at Ford. Assume the
two brake designs are different.

In Case 3, Tom applies his knowledge to the same area, brake design, and
the knowledge is specific knowledge of brake design over which Ford has a
 4.4 Line-Drawing 86

rightful claim. Tom’s action in Case 3 is wrong.

Additional features may come to light in analyzing a particular case. There
can also be other intermediate cases between the ones presented here. The
particular case of interest must be compared with the spectrum of cases to
determine where the line between permissible and impermissible action should
be drawn.

A local town pays $150 per ton to dispose of its garbage at a landfill. A proposal
from a private company offered the following:

F
Build a plant that will incinerate the garbage and cost the town $50 per ton instead
of the $150. This plant will employ more than 50 workers but will produce a
noticeable odor affecting the health of residents living within 1 kilometer around
the plant.
Town engineers recommended the use of special filtration devices that will
eliminate the negative health effects but emit a visual cloud of vapor on certain
days of the year. Those clouds could be unpleasant to look at but will not cause any
health problems. The filtration devices will increase the cost by $30 per ton.
LS
Use the Line Drawing technique, Negative and Positive Paradigm to evaluate the
two proposals and advice the town whether to accept the first proposal, second
proposal or reject them both?

SOLUTION: Line Drawing with Negative and positive Paradigm

1st Proposal
Negative Positive
Cost Savings _____________________________X___
Health (odor) ________________________________
X
Employ Workers ________________________X_______
 4.4 Line-Drawing 87

2st Proposal
Negative Positive
Cost Savings _______________________X_________
Health __________________________X____
Employ Workers __________________X____________
Visual _______X_______________________

F
Conclusion:
The 1st proposal has two positive and one negative paradigm which is an indication
for acceptance. But since the negative paradigm is encircled, its weight supersedes
the two positives. Therefore, the 1st proposal is REJECTED.

The 2nd proposal has 3 positives and one negative all of equal weight. Therefore,
LS
the positive outweigh the negative and the 2nd proposal is ACCEPTED.

Amanda Case
Amanda signs an agreement with Company A (with no time limit) that
obligates her not to reveal its trade secrets. Amanda later moves to
Company B, where she finds a use for some ideas that she conceived while
at Company A. Amanda worked on those ideas on her own time and
frequently she utilized the laboratory and office equipment of Company
A to verify certain information. She never developed the ideas into an
industrial process at Company A, and Company B is not in competition with
Company A, but she still wonders whether using those ideas at Company B
is a violation of the agreement she had with Company A. She has an uneasy
feeling that she is in a gray area and wonders where to draw the line between
the legitimate and illegitimate use of knowledge. How should she proceed?
 4.4 Line-Drawing 88

The case of Amanda wondering whether it is morally acceptable to use ideas at

Company B that she developed while working at Company A Because she feels
she is in a gray area, it may be useful for her to compare her circumstance with
a negative and positive paradigm in regard to taking one’s ideas to a new place
of employment. In determining what these paradigms might be, she should
try to construct a list of key features that can be placed on a spectrum ranging
from negative to positive. For example, violating a trade secret policy would be
a negative feature, counting strongly against the appropriateness of taking
her ideas to Company B. Acquiring permission from Company A would be a
positive feature, counting strongly in favor of the appropriateness of taking
her ideas to Company Schematically, Table 4.3 represents this part of Amanda’s
strategy.

F
A case dominated by negative features would be a negative paradigm, a clear
instance of wrongdoing. A case dominated by positive features would be a
positive paradigm, a clear instance of acceptable behavior. Amanda’s situation
is the test case. Once Amanda identifies the key features of her negative and
positive paradigms, she can begin comparing the features of her situation
with those of the paradigms. For example, a negative feature of her situation
is that she signed a trade secret agreement that may include her ideas and
LS
apparently she has not sought permission from Company A to use her ideas at
Company B. A positive feature is that Company A and Company B are not
competitors.

As Amanda engages in this comparative analysis, she may find that she has
not thought thoroughly enough about certain features. For example, she may
not have thought much about the extent to which others at Company A
might also have helped develop her ideas. Or, although she developed her
ideas on her own time, she might realize that Company A’s lab and
equipment played a crucial role in their development. Or, although
Company A and B were not competitors when

TABLE 4.3 Features of Paradigms

Negative Paradigm Positive Paradigm

(Clearly wrong) (Clearly acceptable)

Negative feature 1
(Vs. signed agreement)
Negative feature 2
(A and B competitors)
Negative feature 3
(Ideas jointly developed)
Negative feature 4
(All ideas developed on job)
Negative feature 5
(Heavy use of A’s lab/equipment)
F
Negative feature n
(Etc.)
LS
4.4 Line-Drawing 89
Positive feature 1
(Permission granted)
Positive feature 2
(A and B not competitors)
Positive feature 3
(Amanda’s ideas only)
Positive feature 4
(All ideas developed off job)
Positive feature 5
(A’s lab/equipment not used)
Positive feature n
(Etc.)
 4.4 Line-Drawing 90

Amanda worked at A, they might become competitors in the area in

which she developed her ideas, especially if those ideas were jointly
developed with others at Company A. Table 4.4 represents some of
these possible complexities.
At this point, although Amanda may feel she has a clearer
understanding of her situation, she may still be unsure what to
conclude. Some features of her case lean in the direction of features of
the negative paradigm, whereas others lean in the direction of the
positive paradigm. Furthermore, in this particular case some of the
negative and positive features may be more important than others
and should be more heavily weighted. Therefore, Amanda still has to

F
assess the importance of the various negative and positive features she
is considering. She may think of other possible scenarios that fall
somewhere between the negative and positive paradigms, and she can
compare the features of her case with those of the intermediate cases.

TABLE 4.4 Paradigm and Test Case Features

Negative Paradigm Positive Paradigm

LS
(Clearly wrong) Test Case (Clearly acceptable)

Negative feature 1 —X———————— Positive feature 1

(Vs. signed agreement)
Negative feature 2
(A and B competitors)
Negative feature 3
(Ideas jointly developed)
Negative feature 4
(Ideas developed on job)
Negative feature 5
(Used A’s lab/equipment)
Negative feature n
(Etc.)
(Permission granted)
————————X— Positive feature 2
(A and B not competitors)
——————X——— Positive feature 3
(Amanda’s ideas only)
———————X—— Positive feature 4
(Ideas developed off job)
—-— X—-----———— Positive feature 5
(A’s equipment not used)
–?—?—?—?—?—?—?—?– Positive feature n
(Et.)
 4.4 Line-Drawing 91

Jim Case
Suppose Jim was solely responsible for specifying materials for the just
completed office building project. Jim evaluated the different materials available
on the market then selected material made by ABC company because it has the
highest quality and average market price. Afterward, Jim received this $950
watch as a gift from ABC company. Perform a Line Drawing Analysis to
determine whether it is ethical for Jim to accept this gift or reject it?

F
SOLUTION: Line Drawing with Negative and positive Paradigm

Responsibility, sole
Negative

_________X_________________________
Positive
LS
Quality, best _____________________________X_____
Price, average ____________________X______________
Benefit, personal ___________________________________
X
Timing, after ___________X_______________________

Discussion:
Jim should reject the watch because it is considered a bribe
since Jim has the sole responsibility for the selection and the
watch benefits Jim personally. Even though the watch was
received after the selection, it creates the expectation of
receiving a gift after every transaction in the future.