What are all the challenges that face your team regarding the successful completion of your capstone project? Have you considered everything?

What do the following mean to you – can you Professional ethics Professional conduct Professional integrity Professional responsibility Legal responsibility

Ethics – the slippery slope?

http://www.gotoquiz.com/the_ultimate_ethics_quiz http://www.acm.org/about/se-code

DEFINE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY https://policy.sheridanc.on.ca/dotNet/documents/?docid=641&mode=view https://policy.sheridanc.on.ca/dotNet/documents/?docid=666&mode=view

A REAL LIFE CASE

KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING INTO CONTRACTS KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GETTING INTO

NDA’S READ THE FINE PRINT MAKE SURE IT IS A NON DISCLOSURE AND NOT A NON COMPETITIVE

PROTECTING YOUR WORK

Seminal case – oracle vs google As long as the specific code written to implement a method is different, anyone is free under the Copyright Act to write his or her own method to carry out exactly the same function or specification of any and all methods used in the Java API. Contrary to Oracle, copyright law does not confer ownership over any and all ways to implement a function or specification, no matter how creative the copyrighted implementation or specification may be. The Act confers ownership only over the specific way in which the author wrote out his version. Others are free to write their own implementation to accomplish the identical function, for, importantly, ideas, concepts and functions cannot be monopolized by copyright.” This order holds that, under the Copyright Act, no matter how creative or imaginative a Java method specification may be, the entire world is entitled to use the same method specification (inputs, outputs, parameters) so long as the line-by-line implementations are different. To repeat the Second Circuit’s phrasing, “there might be a myriad of ways in which a programmer may … express the idea embodied in a given subroutine.”

The Canadian Copyright Act explicitly extends protection to “computer programs”, a subset of literary works, which are defined as “a set of instructions or statements, expressed, fixed, embodied or stored in any manner, that is to be used directly or indirectly in a computer in order to bring about a specific result”. While Canadian courts have not dealt with the threshold issue, it would appear that most APIs would meet the definition of “computer program”, being a set of instructions or statements which are to be used when one computer program interfaces with (or “speaks with”) another.

if there is only one or a very limited number of ways to achieve a particular result in a computer program, to hold that such way or ways are protected by copyright could grant a monopoly on the idea or function itself. In that case, the Court accepted that the “merger” doctrine prevalent in US law is a natural corollary of the idea/expression distinction fundamental to Canadian law (although it did not formally adopt the doctrine). The “merger” doctrine holds that the expression of an idea loses copyright eligibility if it is inextricably linked with its underlying idea.

What was covered in this seminar Ethics Sheridan Code of Conduct Ethics for IT Professionals IP Student rights What constitutes transfer of IP NDAs What to avoid Examples What to do if in doubt COPYRIGHT LAW (CANADA)

Professional Associations Professional Affiliations Sheridan Policies https://policy.sheridanc.on.ca/dotNet/documents/?docid=777&mode=view https://policy.sheridanc.on.ca/dotNet/documents/?docid=673&mode=view http://www.computing-professional.org/index.html Professional Associations http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics Professional Affiliations http://www.nspe.org/resources/ethics/code-ethics/engineers-creed http://www.computing-professional.org/oath.html