Introduction
Recently, a suitcase has taken place in the USA, and the results have been widely broadcast among the States. The suitcase participants were the University of Wisconsin-Madison, on the one hand, and the Apple Corporation, on the other. The university, the side that filled in the suit, was able to win the court and obtain a significant sum of money. In this paper, after demonstrating the point of the situation, we will provide some ethical considerations related to this case and numerous similar cases that undoubtedly take place throughout the world.
The Crux of the Situation
The situation that occurred is related to the fact that Apple had for some time been using a special piece of technology patented by the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF) of the University of Wisconsin-Madison (Chung par. 1-3). The company of Apple did not buy the patent and get the proper authorization from its owner, but still was using the device to improve the value of their products. The piece of technology that was being used by Apple is a microchip that enhances the efficiency of computer processors (Woollaston par. 14). The microchip was patented by the University in 1998 (Condliffe par. 1).
But Apple illegally utilized this microchip while creating their iPhones and iPads during 2013 and 2014; in particular, the piece of technology was utilized in the Apple’s A7, A8, and A8X processors, the ones which were used in several versions of the iPad, and in the iPhones 5s, 6, and 6+ (Reuter’s par. 6). When WARF of the University of Wisconsin discovered this, they sued the business giant to be able to get some financial compensation for their loss. Fung states that Apple was initially sued for approximately $400 million of compensation (par. 2). On the other hand, it appears that the university was able to win only $234 million in the lawsuit (Dzimwasha par. 1).
The sum might seem large from the university’s perspective, but it is pointed out that Apple was able to get a daily net profit of approximately $134.7 million during the first six months of 2015; this means that the lost lawsuit will cost Apple only nearly 42 hours of profit (Clover par. 6). Therefore, it appears after all that, even despite the court’s ruling and the lost case, Apple did not take major losses due to the illegal usage of the patented product. It is also important to remember that the use of the technology which enhanced the company’s product did not only make the product more expensive, it also added to the reputation of the company, and, therefore, yielded even more profits for the industrial giant.
Ethical Problems Related to the Issue
It is clear that the whole situation with Apple clandestinely using the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s patented product raises several ethical issues. One might say that the business’s attempt to get more profit this way should be considered outrageous. Indeed, large corporations are often the first ones to complain about the breaches of intellectual rights. To be more precise, their intellectual rights. They know that these rights bring tremendous profits to them, and they protect them fiercely. But it appears that Apple has rather double standards (and, quite probably, many other major businesses, too; for instance, the same University of Wisconsin-Madison sued Intel for the unpatented usage of the very same chip in 2008 (Dzimwasha par. 6)).
Instead of complying with the rules which ultimately serve the company the most, Apple only chooses to use a rule wherever it brings more profit, opting to disregard it if the potential profit exceeds the potential risk. As we have already mentioned, due to the suitcase, Apple, on the average, only lost approximately 42 hours of profit.
In our opinion, it is beyond any reasonable doubt that Apple carefully calculated the risks related to using the chip secretly, and ruled out that even in the case of an unsuccessful lawsuit, they would lose much less than they would gain from using the product secretly. The fact that purchasing the patent would not only have maintained the compliance with the company’s legal duties but also would have provided the University, an educational and scientific institution, with finances, also did not have enough weight in comparison to the profit attainment.
Conclusion
To sum up, it is worth stressing that, after suing the company of Apple in the court of law for the illegal use of their patented product, the University of Wisconsin-Madison was able to win the case and obtain approximately $234 million as compensation. But the lost case does not appear to have cost Apple much; the sum is equivalent to approximately 42 hours of work of the company. Apple calculated the risks of the unauthorized use of the microchip and decided that it would be more profitable to use it clandestinely rather than buy the patent. Unfortunately, it appears clear that Apple is not the only company that would use such methods to gain additional income.
Works Cited
Chung, Andrew. Apple Loses Patent Lawsuit to University of Wisconsin-Madison. 2015. Web.
Clover, Juli. Apple Ordered to Pay University of Wisconsin $234 Million in A7/A8 Patent Lawsuit. 2015. Web.
Condliffe, Jamie. Apple Found Guilty of Using University of Wisconsin Patent in its Chips. 2015. Web.
Dzimwasha, Taku. Apple Ordered to Pay £151m to Wisconsin University in Patent Case. 2015. Web.
Fung, Brian. Apple is Learning an Expensive Lesson about Universities. 2015. Web.
Reuters. Apple Ordered to Pay Huge Damages in Patent Case. 2015. Web.
Woollaston, Victoria. Apple Loses Phone Chip Patent Lawsuit: Tech Firm Faces Damages of up to $860 Million for Infringing University Design. 2015. Web.