Editing Business ethics (section)

==Functional business areas==
===Finance===
Fundamentally, finance is a social science discipline.<ref name="Dobson, p. xvii">{{harvnb|Dobson|1997|p=xvii}}</ref> The discipline borders [[behavioral economics]], [[sociology]],<ref>Cetina, K. K., & Preda, A. (Eds.). (2005). The sociology of financial markets. Oxford University Press {{ISBN|0-19-929692-8}}</ref> [[economics]], [[accounting]] and [[management]]. It concerns technical issues such as the mix of debt and [[equity (finance)|equity]], [[dividend policy]], the evaluation of alternative investment projects, [[options strategies|options]], [[futures exchange|futures]], [[swap (finance)|swaps]], and other [[derivative (finance)|derivatives]], [[portfolio (finance)|portfolio]] [[diversification (finance)|diversification]] and many others. Finance is often mistaken by people to be a discipline free from ethical burdens.<ref name="Dobson, p. xvii"/> The [[2008 financial crisis]] caused critics to challenge the ethics of the executives in charge of U.S. and European financial institutions and financial regulatory bodies.<ref>Huevel, K. et al., (2009). Meltdown: how greed and corruption shattered our financial system and how we can recover. New York: Nation Books {{ISBN|1-56858-433-4}}.</ref> Finance ethics is overlooked for another reason—issues in finance are often addressed as matters of law rather than ethics.<ref name="a153">Boatright, J. R. [https://books.google.com/books?id=PDXVnfyKHBIC&pg=PA153 Finance ethics]{{harvnb|Frederic|2002|pp=153–163}} {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130510023456/https://books.google.com/books?id=PDXVnfyKHBIC&pg=PA153 |date=May 10, 2013 }}</ref>

====Finance paradigm====
<!--"finance paradigm" needs a definition -->
[[Aristotle]] said, "the end and purpose of the polis is the good life".<ref>Aristotle 1948 Politics E. Barker, trans. Oxford: Clarendon, p. 38.</ref> [[Adam Smith]] characterized the good life in terms of material goods and intellectual and moral excellences of character.<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1759|p=Virgin Islands.i.15}}{{Dead link|date=March 2011|There is no Book Virgin Islands!}}</ref> Smith in his ''[[The Wealth of Nations]]'' commented, "All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind."<ref>{{harvnb|Smith|1759|p=III.iv.448}}</ref>{{Wikiquote|Adam Smith}} However, a section of economists influenced by the ideology of [[neoliberalism]], interpreted the objective of economics to be maximization of [[economic growth]] through accelerated [[consumption (economics)|consumption]] and [[Manufacturing|production]] of [[goods and services]]. Neoliberal ideology promoted finance from its position as a component of economics to its core.{{Citation needed|date=March 2011}} Proponents of the ideology hold that unrestricted financial flows, if redeemed from the shackles of "financial repressions", best help impoverished nations to grow.{{Citation needed|date=March 2011}} The theory holds that open financial systems accelerate economic growth by encouraging foreign capital inflows, thereby enabling higher levels of savings, investment, employment, productivity and "welfare",<ref>{{cite news|url=http://ipezone.blogspot.com/2007/07/fts-wolf-in-defense-of-neoliberalism.html|date=July 24, 2007|newspaper=[[The Financial Times]]|last=Wolf|first=Martin|title=Wolf: In Defense of Neoliberalism|access-date=March 11, 2011}}</ref><ref>welfare in terms of preference satisfaction {{harvnb|O'Neill|1998|p=56}}</ref><ref>Hayek F.A. 1976 Law, Legislation and Liberty: Volume 2 London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 15–30.</ref> along with containing corruption. Neoliberals recommended that governments open their financial systems to the global market with minimal regulation over capital flows.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lewis|first1=P.|first2=H.|last2=Stein|year=1997|title=Shifting fortunes: the political economy of financial liberalization in Nigeria|journal=World Development|volume=25|issue=1|pages=5–22|doi=10.1016/S0305-750X(96)00085-X}}</ref><ref>Grabel, Ilene (2003), 'International private capital flows and developing countries', in Ha-Joon Chang (ed.), Rethinking Development Economics, London: Anthem Press, pp. 325–45</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Eichengreen|first1=B.|title=Capital Account Liberalization: What Do Cross-Country Studies Tell Us?|journal=The World Bank Economic Review|volume=15|page=341|year=2001|doi=10.1093/wber/15.3.341|issue=3|citeseerx=10.1.1.551.5658}}</ref><ref>Valdez, J. G. (1995). [https://books.google.com/books?id=-oJq_Rpcs_AC Pinochet's Economists: The Chicago School in Chili] Cambridge University Press {{ISBN|0-521-45146-9}}</ref> The recommendations however, met with criticisms from various schools of ethical philosophy. Some [[pragmatism|pragmatic ethicists]], found these claims to be unfalsifiable and a priori, although neither of these makes the recommendations false or unethical per se.<ref>Samuels, W., J (1977). Ideology in Economics In S. Weintraub (Ed.), Modern Economic Thought (pp. 467–484). Oxford: Blackwell.</ref><ref>Charles, W., & Wisman, J. ([1976] 1993). [https://books.google.com/books?id=PqpBdykSrEEC&pg=PA79 The Chicago School: Positivism or Ideal Type] In W. J. Samuels (Ed.), The Chicago School of Political Economy New Brunswick Transaction Publishers {{ISBN|1-56000-633-1}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Duska|2007|pp=51–62}}</ref> Raising economic growth to the highest value necessarily means that welfare is subordinate, although advocates dispute this saying that economic growth provides more welfare than known alternatives.<ref>{{harvnb|O'Neill|1998|p=55}}</ref> Since history shows that neither regulated nor unregulated firms always behave ethically, neither regime offers an ethical [[panacea]].<ref name=salinger>Salinger, L. M., Ed. (2005). Encyclopedia of White Collar Corporate Crime. California, Sage Reference {{ISBN|0-7619-3004-3}}.</ref><ref>Dembinski, P. H., Lager, C., Cornford, A., & Bonvin, J.-M. (Eds.). (2006). Enron and World Finance: A Case Study in Ethics. New York: Palgrave.</ref><ref>Markham, J. W. (2006). [https://books.google.com/books?id=Z7qTGiF8FCgC A financial history of Modern US Corporate Scandals]. New York: M.E. Sharpe {{ISBN|0-7656-1583-5}}</ref>

Neoliberal recommendations to developing countries to unconditionally open up their economies to transnational finance corporations were fiercely contested by some ethicists.<ref>Escobar, A. (1995). [https://books.google.com/books?id=mK2bzANQ4_gC Encountering Development: The Making and Unmaking of the Third World]. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press {{ISBN|0-691-00102-2}}.</ref><ref>Ferguson, J. (1997). [https://books.google.com/books?id=NueOngvzwK0C&pg=PA150 Anthropology and its Evil Twin: ''Development'' in the Constitution of a Discipline]. In F. Cooper & R. Packard (Eds.), International Development and the Social Sciences: Essays on the History and Politics of Knowledge (pp. 150–175). Berkeley: University of California Press {{ISBN|0-520-20957-5}}.</ref><ref>Frank, A. G. (1991). [http://www.druckversion.studien-von-zeitfragen.net/The%20Underdevelopment%20of%20Development.htm The Underdevelopment of Development]. Scandinavian Journal of Development Alternatives(10), 5–72.</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Graeber|first=David|title=The Anthropology of Globalization (with Notes on Neomedievalism, and the End of the Chinese Model of the Nation-State): Millennial Capitalism and the Culture of Neoliberalism. Consumers and Citizens: Globalization and Multicultural Conflicts. The Anthropology of Globalization: A Reader|journal=American Anthropologist|volume=104|page=1222|year=2002|doi=10.1525/aa.2002.104.4.1222|issue=4}}</ref><ref>Smith, D. A., Solinger, D. J., & Topik, S. C. (Eds.). (1999). [https://books.google.com/books?id=oxK58B5zTdUC States and Sovereignty in the Global Economy]. London: Routledge {{ISBN|0-415-20119-5}}.</ref> The claim that deregulation and the opening up of economies would reduce corruption was also contested.<ref>Fisman, R., & Miguel, E. (2008). [https://books.google.com/books?id=AFdIJh1Z7roC Economic Gangsters: Corruption, Violence and the Poverty of Nations]. Princeton: Princeton University Press {{ISBN|0-691-13454-5}}.</ref><ref>Global Corruption Report 2009: Corruption and Private Sector. (A Report by Transparency International) (2009). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press {{ISBN|0-521-13240-1}}.</ref>

Dobson observes, "a rational agent is simply one who pursues personal material advantage ad infinitum. In essence, to be rational in finance is to be individualistic, materialistic, and competitive. Business is a game played by individuals, as with all games the object is to win, and winning is measured in terms solely of material wealth. Within the discipline, this rationality concept is never questioned, and has indeed become the theory-of-the-firm's sine qua non".<ref>{{harvnb|Dobson|1997|p=ix}} "Experts of finance tend to view business firm as, 'an abstract engine that uses money today to make money tomorrow'</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1086/296380|author=Miller, M. H. |year=1986|title=Behavioral Rationality in Finance: The Case of Dividends|journal=Journal of Business|volume=59|pages=451–468|id=see p. 452}}</ref> Financial ethics is in this view a mathematical function of shareholder wealth. Such simplifying assumptions were once necessary for the construction of mathematically robust models. However, [[signalling (economics)|signalling theory]] and [[Principal–agent problem|agency theory]] extended the paradigm to greater realism.<ref>{{harvnb|Dobson|1997|pp=xvi, 142}}</ref>

===Other issues===
[[Justice|Fairness]] in trading practices, trading conditions, financial contracting, sales practices, consultancy services, tax payments, internal audit, external audit and [[executive compensation]] also, fall under the umbrella of finance and accounting.<ref name="a153"/><ref>Armstrong, M. B. (2002). Ethical Issues in Accounting. In N. E. Bowie (Ed.), [https://books.google.com/books?id=CHtbwX11oUIC&pg=PA145 The Blackwell guide to business ethics] (pp. 145–157). Oxford: Blackwell {{ISBN|0-631-22123-9}}</ref> Particular corporate ethical/legal abuses include: [[creative accounting]], [[earnings management]], misleading financial analysis, [[insider trading]], [[securities fraud]], [[bribery]]/kickbacks and [[facilitation payment]]s. Outside of corporations, [[bucket shop (stock market)|bucket shops]] and [[forex scam]]s are criminal manipulations of financial markets. Cases include [[accounting scandals]], [[Enron]], [[WorldCom]] and [[Satyam scandal|Satyam]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=Top Accounting Scandals |url=https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/accounting/top-accounting-scandals/ |access-date=2024-05-29 |website=Corporate Finance Institute |language=en-US}}</ref>

===Human resource management===
[[Human resource management]] occupies the sphere of activity of [[recruitment]] selection, orientation, [[performance appraisal]], [[training and development]], [[industrial relations]] and [[Occupational safety and health|health and safety]] issues.<ref name="a102">Walsh, A. J. HRM and the ethics of commodified work in a market economy. {{harvnb|Pinnington|Macklin|Campbell|2007|pp=102–118}}</ref> Business Ethicists differ in their orientation towards labor ethics. Some assess human resource policies according to whether they support an egalitarian workplace and the [[dignity of labor]].<ref>Kuchinke, K. P. (2005). [https://books.google.com/books?id=pA0PKmbhKaUC&pg=PA141 The self at work: theories of persons, meaning of work and their implications for HRD] {{harvnb|Elliott|Turnbull|2005|pp=141–154}}</ref><ref>Dirkx, J. M. (2005). [https://books.google.com/books?id=pA0PKmbhKaUC&pg=PA155 To develop a firm persuasion: Workplace learning and the problem of meaning].{{harvnb|Elliott|Turnbull|2005|pp=155–174}}</ref>

Issues including [[At-will employment|employment itself]], [[workplace surveillance|privacy]], compensation in accord with [[comparable worth]], [[collective bargaining]] (and/or its opposite) can be seen either as inalienable rights<ref name=pin>Introduction: ethical human resource management {{harvnb|Pinnington|Macklin|Campbell|2007|pp=1–22}}</ref><ref>Duska, R. [https://books.google.com/books?id=PDXVnfyKHBIC&pg=PA257 Employee Rights].{{harvnb|Frederic|2002|pp=257–268}}</ref> or as negotiable.<ref>Koehn, D. (2002). [https://books.google.com/books?id=CHtbwX11oUIC&pg=PA225 Ethical Issues in Human Resources]. In N. E. Bowie (Ed.), The Blackwell guide to business ethics (pp. 225–243). Oxford: Blackwell {{ISBN|0-631-22123-9}}.</ref><ref>Watson, I., Buchanan, J., Campbell, I., and Briggs, C. (2003). Fragmented Futures: New Challenges in Working Life. ACIRRT, University of Sydney, NSW: The Federation Press.</ref><ref>Smith, N. H. (1997). Strong Hermeneutics: Contingency and Moral Identity. London: Routledge.</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Machan|2007|p=67}}</ref>
[[Discrimination]] by age (preferring the [[ageism|young]] or the [[seniority|old]]), [[sex discrimination|gender]]/[[sexual harassment]], [[racial discrimination|race]], [[religious discrimination|religion]], [[disability]], weight and attractiveness. A common approach to remedying discrimination is [[affirmative action]].

Once hired, employees have the right to the occasional cost of living increases, as well as raises based on merit. Promotions, however, are not a right, and there are often fewer openings than qualified applicants. It may seem unfair if an employee who has been with a company longer is passed over for a promotion, but it is not unethical. It is only unethical if the employer did not give the employee proper consideration or used improper criteria for the promotion.<ref>DeGeorge, Richard. "Business Ethics, Seventh Edition". Prentice Hall, 2010, p. 351-352.</ref> Each employer should know the distinction between what is unethical and what is illegal. If an action is illegal it is breaking the law but if an action seems morally incorrect that is unethical. In the workplace what is unethical does not mean illegal and should follow the guidelines put in place by OSHA ([[Occupational Safety and Health Administration]]), EEOC ([[Equal Employment Opportunity Commission]]), and other law-binding entities.

Potential employees have ethical [[obligation]]s to employers, involving intellectual property protection and [[whistle-blowing]].

Employers must consider [[Occupational safety and health|workplace safety]], which may involve modifying the workplace, or providing appropriate training or hazard disclosure. This differentiates on the location and type of work that is taking place and can need to comply with the standards to protect employees and non-employees under workplace safety.

Larger economic issues such as [[immigration]], [[trade policy]], [[globalization]] and [[trade union]]ism affect workplaces and have an ethical dimension, but are often beyond the purview of individual companies.<ref name=pin/><ref>Legge, K. The ethics of HRM in dealing with individual employees without collective representation. {{harvnb|Pinnington|Macklin|Campbell|2007|pp=35 ff}}</ref><ref>Morehead, A., Steele, M., Stephen, K., and Duffin, L. (1997). Changes at Work: The 1995 Australian Workplace Industrial Relations Survey. Melbourne: Longman.</ref>

====Trade unions====
[[Trade union]]s, for example, may push employers to establish [[due process]] for workers, but may also cause job loss by demanding unsustainable compensation and work rules.<ref>Reinhold, R. (2000). 'Union Membership in 2000: Numbers Decline During Record Economic Expansion', Illinois Labor Market Review, 6.</ref><ref>Akyeampong, E. (1997). 'A Statistical Portrait of the Trade Union Movement', Perspectives on Labour and Income, 9: 45–54.</ref><ref>Kuruvilla, S., Das, S., Kwon, H., and Kwon, S. (2002). 'Trade Union Growth and Decline in Asia', British Journal of Industrial Relations, 40(3): 431–61.</ref><ref>Watson T.J (2003). 'Ethical Choice in Managerial Work: The Scope for Managerial Choices in an Ethically Irrational World', Human Relations, 56(2): 167–85.</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Woodd|first=Maureen|title=Human resource specialists—guardians of ethical conduct?|journal=Journal of European Industrial Training|volume=21|page=110|year=1997|doi=10.1108/03090599710161810|issue=3}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Guest|first1=David E|title=Human resource management—the workers' verdict|journal=Human Resource Management Journal|volume=9|page=5|year=1999|doi=10.1111/j.1748-8583.1999.tb00200.x|issue=3}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Machan|2007|p=29}}</ref><ref>Desai, M. (1991). Issues concerning setting up of social work specializations in India. International Social Work, 34, 83–95</ref><ref>Guest, D. E. HRM and performance: can partnership address the ethical dilemmas? {{harvnb|Pinnington|Macklin|Campbell|2007|pp=52–65}}</ref>

Unionized workplaces may confront [[union busting]] and [[strike breaking]] and face the ethical implications of work rules that advantage some workers over others.{{citation needed|date=May 2021}}

====Management strategy====
Among the many people management strategies that companies employ are a "soft" approach that regards employees as a source of creative energy and participants in workplace decision-making, a "hard" version explicitly focused on control<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Storey|first1=D.J.|title=The Problems Facing New Firms &#91;1&#93;|journal=Journal of Management Studies|volume=22|page=327|year=1985|doi=10.1111/j.1467-6486.1985.tb00079.x|issue=3}}</ref> and [[Theory Z]] that emphasizes philosophy, culture and consensus.<ref>{{cite book|last=Ouchi|first=William G.|year=1981|title=Theory Z|url=https://archive.org/details/theoryzhowameric1982ouch|url-access=registration|location=New York|publisher=Avon Books|isbn=978-0-380-59451-1}}</ref> None ensure ethical behavior.<ref>{{harvnb|Pinnington|Macklin|Campbell|2007|p=3}} Introduction: ethical human resource management</ref> Some studies claim that sustainable success requires a humanely treated and satisfied workforce.<ref>Schneider, B., Hanges, P., Smith, D., and Salvaggio, A. (2003). 'Which Comes First: Employee Attitudes or Organizational Financial and Market Performance?', Journal of Applied Psychology, 88: 836–51.</ref><ref>Guest, D. E., Michie, J., Conway, N., and Sheehan, M. (2003). 'Human Resource Management and Corporate Performance in the UK', British Journal of Industrial Relations, 41(2): 291–314.</ref><ref>Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. Strategic management and human resources: the pursuit of productivity, flexibility, and legitimacy {{harvnb|Pinnington|Macklin|Campbell|2007|pp=66–80}}</ref>

===Sales and marketing===
{{Main|Marketing ethics}}
Marketing ethics came of age only as late as the 1990s.<ref>{{harvnb|Murphy|2002|pp=165–185}}</ref> Marketing ethics was approached from ethical perspectives of [[virtue]] or [[virtue ethics]], [[deontology]], [[consequentialism]], [[pragmatic ethics|pragmatism]] and relativism.<ref>{{harvnb|Jones, Parker, et al.|2005|p=3}}</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Murphy|2002|pp=168–169}}</ref>

Ethics in marketing deals with the principles, values and/or ideas by which marketers (and marketing institutions) ought to act.<ref>Brenkert, G. K. [https://books.google.com/books?id=PDXVnfyKHBIC&pg=PA179 Marketing ethics].{{harvnb|Frederic|2002|pp=179}}</ref> Marketing ethics is also contested terrain, beyond the previously described issue of potential conflicts between profitability and other concerns. Ethical marketing issues include marketing redundant or dangerous products/services,<ref>Marcoux, A. (2009). Business-Focused Business Ethics. in Normative Theory and Business Ethics. J. Smith. Plymouth Rowman & Littlefield: pp. 17–34 {{ISBN|0-7425-4841-4}}</ref><ref>Fisher, B., 2003-05-27 [http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p111389_index.html "Ethics of Target Marketing: Process, Product or Target?"] Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Marriott Hotel, San Diego, California</ref><ref>Groucutt, J., P. Leadley, ''et al.'' (2004). [https://books.google.com/books?id=cd6Sjxu2lesC&pg=PA75 Marketing: essential principles, new realities]. London, Kogan p. 75 {{ISBN|0-7494-4114-3}}</ref> [[Transparency (behavior)|transparency]] about environmental risks, transparency about [[Mandatory labelling|product ingredients]] such as [[genetically modified organism]]s<ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1108/03090560710718102 |author=Murphey, P. E. |author2=G. R. Laczniak |year=2007 |title=An ethical basis for relationship marketing: a virtue ethics perspective |journal=European Journal of Marketing |volume=41 |pages=37–57 |url=http://www.ethicalbusiness.nd.edu/documents/European%20Journal%20of%20Marketing.pdf |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100616003726/http://www.ethicalbusiness.nd.edu/documents/European%20Journal%20of%20Marketing.pdf |url-status=dead |archive-date=2010-06-16 |display-authors=etal}}</ref><ref>[http://oreilly.com/openbook/freedom/ Free as in Freedom: Table of Contents]. Oreilly.com. Retrieved on 2010-09-02.</ref><ref>[http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/regulation/labelling/ Labelling of GMO Products: Freedom of Choice for Consumers] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160121103337/http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/regulation/labelling/ |date=2016-01-21 }}. Gmo-compass.org. Retrieved on 2010-09-02.</ref><ref>[http://ec.europa.eu/food/food/biotechnology/gmfood/labelling_en.htm EUROPA—Food Safety—Biotechnology—GM Food & Feed—Labelling]. Ec.europa.eu (2003-09-22). Retrieved on 2010-09-02.</ref> possible health risks, [[financial risk]]s, security risks, etc.,<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Anand|first1=V.|last2=Rosen|first2=C. C.|title=The Ethics of Organizational Secrets|journal=Journal of Management Inquiry|volume=17|page=97|year=2008|doi=10.1177/1056492607312785|issue=2|s2cid=143933381}}</ref> respect for [[consumer privacy]] and autonomy,<ref>Brenkert, G. K. [https://books.google.com/books?id=PDXVnfyKHBIC&pg=PA178 Marketing ethics] {{harvnb|Frederic|2002|pp=178–193}}</ref> [[advertising]] truthfulness and fairness in [[pricing]] & distribution.<ref>{{harvnb|Murphy|2002|p=165}}</ref>

According to Borgerson, and Schroeder (2008), marketing can influence individuals' perceptions of and interactions with other people, implying an ethical responsibility to avoid distorting those perceptions and interactions.<ref>Borgerson, J. L. and J. E. Schroeder (2008). [https://books.google.com/books?id=RsBfMI6di8gC&pg=PA87 Building an Ethics of Visual Representation: Contesting Epistemic Closure in Marketing Communication]. in Cutting Edge Issues in Business Ethics. M. P. Morland and P. Werhane. Boston, Springer pp. 87–108 {{ISBN|1-4020-8400-5}}</ref>

Marketing ethics involves pricing practices, including illegal actions such as [[price fixing]] and legal actions including [[price discrimination]] and [[price skimming]]. Certain promotional activities have drawn fire, including [[greenwash]]ing, [[bait and switch]], [[shill]]ing, [[viral marketing]], [[spam (electronic)]], [[pyramid scheme]]s and [[multi-level marketing]]. Advertising has raised objections about [[attack ad]]s, [[subliminal message]]s, [[sex in advertising]] and [[marketing in schools]].

===Inter-organizational relationships===
Scholars in business and management have paid much attention to the ethical issues in the different forms of relationships between organizations such as buyer-supplier relationships, networks, [[Strategic alliance|alliances]], or [[joint venture]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Abosag|first1=Ibrahim|last2=Yen|first2=Dorothy|last3=Barnes|first3=Bradley|date=2016|title=What is Dark about the Dark-Side of Business Relationships?|url=https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/21996/|journal=Industrial Marketing Management|language=en|volume=55|pages=5–9|doi=10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.02.008}}</ref> Drawing in particular on [[Transaction cost analysis|transaction cost theory]] and [[agency theory]], they note the risk of [[Opportunism|opportunistic]] and unethical practices between partners through, for instance, shirking, [[poaching]], and other deceitful behaviors.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Saini|first=Amit|date=2010|title=Purchasing Ethics and Inter-Organizational Buyer–Supplier Relational Determinants: A Conceptual Framework|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0432-2|journal=Journal of Business Ethics|volume=95|issue=3|pages=439–455|doi=10.1007/s10551-010-0432-2|s2cid=144375858|issn=0167-4544}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hill|first1=James A.|last2=Eckerd|first2=Stephanie|last3=Wilson|first3=Darryl|last4=Greer|first4=Bertie|date=2008|title=The effect of unethical behavior on trust in a buyer-supplier relationship: The mediating role of psychological contract violation|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2008.10.002|journal=Journal of Operations Management|volume=27|issue=4|pages=281–293|doi=10.1016/j.jom.2008.10.002|issn=0272-6963}}</ref> In turn, research on inter-organizational relationships has observed the role of formal and informal mechanisms to both prevent unethical practices and mitigate their consequences. It especially discusses the importance of formal contracts and relational norms between partners to manage ethical issues.

===Emerging issues===
Being the most important element of a business, stakeholders' main concern is to determine whether or not the business is behaving ethically or unethically. The business's actions and decisions should be primarily ethical before it happens to become an ethical or even legal issue. "In the case of the government, community, and society what was merely an ethical issue can become a legal debate and eventually law."<ref name="ReferenceA">Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making & Cases, 11e. O.C Ferrell, John Fraedrich and Linda Ferrell</ref>
Some emerging ethical issues are:
* [[Corporate environmental responsibility]]: Businesses impacts on eco-systemic environments can no longer be neglected and ecosystems' impacts on business activities are becoming more imminent.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Meinhold |first1=Roman |title=Business Ethics and Sustainability |date=2022 |publisher=Routledge |location=New York |isbn=978-1-003-12765-9 |pages=75–76 |edition=1 }}</ref>
* [[Justice|Fairness]]: The three aspects that motivate people to be fair is; equality, optimization, and reciprocity. Fairness is the quality of being just, equitable, and impartial.
* Misuse of company's time and resources: This particular topic may not seem to be a very common one, but it is very important, as it costs a company billions of dollars on a yearly basis. This misuse is from late arrivals, leaving early, long lunch breaks, inappropriate sick days etc. This has been observed as a major form of misconduct in businesses today. One of the greatest ways employees participate in the misuse of company's time and resources is by using the company computer for personal use.
* [[Consumer fraud]]: There are many different types of fraud, namely; friendly fraud, return fraud, wardrobing, price arbitrage, returning stolen goods. Fraud is a major unethical practice within businesses that should be paid special attention. Consumer fraud is when consumers attempt to deceive businesses for their very own benefit.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>
* Abusive behavior: A common ethical issue among employees. Abusive behavior consists of inflicting intimidating acts on other employees. Such acts include harassing, using profanity, threatening someone physically and insulting them, and being annoying.<ref>Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making & Cases, 9e. O.C Ferrell, John Fraedrich and Linda Ferrell</ref>

===Production===
This area of business ethics usually deals with the duties of a company to ensure that products and production processes do not needlessly cause harm. Since few goods and services can be produced and consumed with zero risks, determining the ethical course can be difficult. In some case, consumers demand products that harm them, such as [[tobacco]] products. Production may have environmental impacts, including [[pollution]], [[habitat destruction]] and [[urban sprawl]]. The downstream effects of technologies [[nuclear power]], [[genetically modified food]] and [[mobile phone]]s may not be well understood. While the [[precautionary principle]] may prohibit introducing new technology whose consequences are not fully understood, that principle would have prohibited the newest technology introduced since the [[industrial revolution|Industrial Revolution]]. Product testing protocols have been attacked for violating the rights of both [[clinical trials|humans]] and [[animal testing|animals]].{{citation needed|date=March 2011}} There are sources that provide information on companies that are environmentally responsible or do not test on animals.

===Property===
{{Main|Private property|Property rights}}
The etymological root of property is the [[Latin]] {{Lang|la|proprius}},<ref>[http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=property Online Etymology Dictionary]. Etymonline.com. Retrieved on 2010-09-02.</ref> which refers to 'nature', 'quality', 'one's own', 'special characteristic', 'proper', 'intrinsic', 'inherent', 'regular', 'normal', 'genuine', 'thorough, complete, perfect' etc. The word property is value loaded and associated with the personal qualities of propriety and respectability, also implies questions relating to ownership. A 'proper' person owns and is true to herself or himself, and is thus genuine, perfect and pure.<ref>{{harvnb|Davies|2007 |p=25}}</ref>

====Modern history of property rights====
Modern discourse on property emerged by the turn of the 17th century within theological discussions of that time. For instance, [[John Locke]] justified [[property rights]] saying that God had made "the earth, and all inferior creatures, [in] common to all men".<ref>Harris, J.W. (1996), "Who owns My Body", Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 16: 55–84. Harris finds this argument a 'spectacular non sequitur,' '[f]rom the fact that nobody owns me if I am not a slave, it simply does not follow that I must own myself'(p. 71)</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.2307/2218464|author=Day, P. J.|year=1966|title=Locke on Property|journal=The Philosophical Quarterly|volume=16|issue=64|pages=207–220|jstor=2218464}}</ref>

In 1802 [[utilitarian]] [[Jeremy Bentham]] stated, "property and law are born together and die together".<ref>Bentham, J. (1931), Theory of Legislation, London: Kegan Paul, p. 113 {{ISBN|978-1-103-20150-1}}</ref>

One argument for property ownership is that it enhances individual liberty by extending the line of non-interference by the state or others around the person.<ref>{{harvnb|Davies|2007 |p=27}}</ref> Seen from this perspective, property right is absolute and property has a special and distinctive character that precedes its legal protection. Blackstone conceptualized property as the "sole and despotic dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in total exclusion of the right of any other individual in the universe".<ref>Blackstone, W. (1766), [http://www.lonang.com/exlibris/blackstone/bla-201.htm Commentaries on the Laws of England, Volume II, Of the Rights of Things] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100203220233/http://www.lonang.com/exlibris/blackstone/bla-201.htm |date=2010-02-03 }}, Oxford: Clarendon Press.</ref>

=====Slaves as property=====
During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, slavery spread to European colonies including America, where colonial legislatures defined the legal status of slaves as a form of property.

Combined with theological justification, the property was taken to be essentially natural ordained by God. Property, which later gained meaning as ownership and appeared natural to Locke, Jefferson and to many of the 18th and 19th century intellectuals as land, labor or idea, and property right over slaves had the same [[Christianity and slavery|theological]] and [[essentialism|essentialized]] justification<ref>{{cite journal|last=Daykin|first=Jeffer B.|title="They Themselves Contribute to Their Misery by Their Sloth": The Justification of Slavery in Eighteenth-Century French Travel Narratives|journal=The European Legacy|volume=11|page=623|year=2006|doi=10.1080/10848770600918117|issue=6|s2cid=143484245}}</ref><ref>Gordon, D. (2009). [http://ssrn.com/abstract=1350522 Gender, Race and Limiting the Constitutional Privilege of Religion as a Haven for Bias: The Bridge Back to the Twentieth Century]. Women's Rights Law Reporter, p. 30.</ref><ref>Sandoval, Alonso De. (2008). [https://books.google.com/books?id=eIHte1t-BKsC&pg=PA17 Treatise on Slavery: Selections from De instauranda Aethiopum salute]. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc. pp. 17, 20.</ref><ref>Bay, M. (2008). Polygenesis Versus Monogenesis In Black and White. In J. H. Moore (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Race and Racism (Vol. 1, pp. 90–93). Detroit: Macmillan Reference:91</ref><ref>Baum, B. (2006). [https://books.google.com/books?id=TnVgKpqCxzQC&pg=PA35 The Rise and Fall of the Caucasian Race: A Political History of Racial Identity]. New York: New York University Press, {{ISBN|0-8147-9892-6}} p. 35.</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.1177/0306312706054859|author=Skinner, D|year=2006|title=Racialized Futures: Biologism and the Changing Politics of Identity|journal=Social Studies of Science|volume=36|issue=3|pages=459–488|jstor=25474453|s2cid=62895742}}</ref>  It was even held{{By whom?|date=September 2024}} that the property in slaves was a sacred right.<ref>Jensen, E. M. (1991). The Good Old Cause': The Ratification of the Constitution and Bill of Rights in South Carolina. In R. J. Haws (Ed.), The South's Role in the Creation of the Bill of Rights. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.</ref><ref>Following a bitter debate over the importation of slaves, Congress was denied, by the 1787 [[Philadelphia Convention]], the authority to prohibit the slave trade to the US until 1808. The rendition of escaped slaves was also a priority for southerners. Accordingly, the fugitive slave clause declared that people held to service or labor under state law "shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due." (Ely, 2008:46)</ref> Wiecek says, "Yet slavery was more clearly and explicitly established under the Constitution than it had been under the Articles".<ref>Wiecek, W. M. (1977). The Sources of Antislavery Constitutionalism in America, 1760–1848. New York: Cornell University Press:63</ref> In an 1857 judgment, [[Supreme Court of the United States|US Supreme Court]] Chief Justice [[Roger B. Taney]] said, "The right of property in a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed in the Constitution."

====Natural right vs social construct====
Neoliberals hold that private property rights are a non-negotiable natural right.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last=Bethell|first=Tom|author-link=Tom Bethell|editor-first=Ronald|editor-last=Hamowy|editor-link=Ronald Hamowy|encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism|chapter=Private Property|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC|year=2008|publisher=[[SAGE Publishing|SAGE]]; [[Cato Institute]]|location=Thousand Oaks, California|doi=10.4135/9781412965811.n243|isbn= 978-1-4129-6580-4|oclc=750831024|lccn=2008009151|pages=393–94}}</ref><ref>[http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/documents/documents_p2.cfm?doc=23 Digital History] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120419075820/http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/documents/documents_p2.cfm?doc=23 |date=2012-04-19 }}. Digitalhistory.uh.edu. Retrieved on 2010-09-02.</ref> Davies counters with "property is no different from other legal categories in that it is simply a consequence of the significance attached by law to the relationships between legal persons."<ref name="Davies 2007 20">{{harvnb|Davies|2007 |p=20}}</ref> Singer claims, "Property is a form of power, and the distribution of power is a political problem of the highest order".<ref>{{harvnb|Singer|2000|p=9}}</ref><ref>Cohen, M. R. (1927). Property and Sovereignty. Cornell Law Quarterly, 13, 8–30. Cohen commenting on the power dimension of property noted, "we must not overlook the actual fact that dominion over things is also imperium over our fellow human beings" p. 13</ref> Rose finds, {{" '}}Property' is only an effect, a construction, of relationships between people, meaning that its objective character is contestable. Persons and things, are 'constituted' or 'fabricated' by legal and other normative techniques."<ref>{{harvnb|Rose|1994|p=14}}</ref><ref>"'Property' has no essential character, but is rather a highly flexible set of rights and responsibilities which congeal in different ways in different contexts" {{harvnb|Davies|2007 |p=20}}</ref> Singer observes, "A private property regime is not, after all, a Hobbesian state of nature; it requires a working legal system that can define, allocate, and enforce property rights."<ref>{{harvnb|Singer|2000|p=8}}</ref> Davis claims that common law theory generally favors the view that "property is not essentially a 'right to a thing', but rather a separable bundle of rights subsisting between persons which may vary according to the context and the object which is at stake".<ref name="Davies 2007 20"/>

In common parlance property rights involve a [[bundle of rights]]<ref>Cooter, R. and T. Ulen (1988). ''Law and Economics''. New York, Harper Collins.</ref> including occupancy, use and enjoyment, and the right to sell, devise, give, or lease all or part of these rights.<ref>[[Tony Honoré|Honoré, A. M.]] (1961). Ownership. In A. G. Guest (Ed.), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence. London: Oxford University Press.; Becker, L. (1980). The Moral Basis of Property Rights In J. Pennock & J. Chapman (Eds.), Property. New York: New York University Press.</ref><ref>However, some scholars often use the terms ownership, property and property rights interchangeably, while others define ownership (or property) as a set of specific rights each attached to the vast array of uses accessible by the owner. Ownership has thus been interpreted as a form of aggregation of such social relations—a bundle of rights over the use of scarce resources . Alchian, A. A. (1965). Some Economics of Property Rights. Il Politico, 30, 816–829</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.2307/797162|author=Epstein, R. A.|year=1997|url=https://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=M1sW1nylSWKQJzZnVYGGY3ZCLG0shFGz4Bjj8YTLjNjFKRGv92Ym!-1814198305!558324302?docId=5000440763|title=A Clear View of the Cathedral: The Dominance of Property Rules|journal=Yale Law Journal|volume=106|issue=7|pages=2091–2107|quote=Bundle of rights is often interpreted as 'full control' over the property by the owner|jstor=797162}}{{Dead link|date=August 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.2307/797592|author1=Merrill, T. W.|author2=Smith, H. E.|year=2001|title=What Happened to Property in Law and Economics?|journal=Yale Law Journal|volume=111|issue=2|pages=357–398|url=http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/what-happened-to-property-in-law-and-economics?/|jstor=797592|access-date=2018-11-24|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140201205042/http://www.yalelawjournal.org/the-yale-law-journal/content-pages/what-happened-to-property-in-law-and-economics?%2F|archive-date=2014-02-01|url-status=dead}}</ref> Custodians of property have obligations as well as rights.<!-- refs don't obviously support this point.--><ref>Property has been conceptualized as absolute ownership with full control over the owned property without being accountable to anyone else {{harvnb|Singer|2000|p=29}}.</ref> Michelman writes, "A property regime thus depends on a great deal of cooperation, trustworthiness, and self-restraint among the people who enjoy it."<!-- isn't this true of all "rights"? what right is secure if society doesn't accept/trust it? Isn't a better criterion the existence of a well-established rule of law that includes property protections?--><ref>Rose (1996), "Property as the Keystone Right?", ''Notre Dame Law Review'' '''71''', pp. 329–365.</ref>

Menon claims that the autonomous individual, responsible for his/her own existence is a cultural construct moulded by [[Western culture]] rather than the truth about the [[human condition]]. Penner views property as an "illusion"—a "normative phantasm" without substance.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Gray|first1=Kevin|title=Property in Thin Air|journal=The Cambridge Law Journal|volume=50|page=252|year=2009|doi=10.1017/S0008197300080508|issue=2|s2cid=146430275 }}</ref>

In the neoliberal literature, the property is part of the private side of a public/private dichotomy and acts a counterweight to state power.<!-- need a cite from that literature--> Davies counters that "any space may be subject to plural meanings or appropriations which do not necessarily come into conflict".

Private property has never been a universal doctrine, although since the end of the Cold War is it has become nearly so. Some societies, e.g., Native American bands, held land, if not all property, in common. When groups came into conflict, the victor often [[Indian Removal Act|appropriated]] the loser's property.<ref>Fischbach, M. R. (2003). [https://archive.org/details/recordsofdisposs00fisc Records of Dispossession: Palestinian Refugee Property and the Arab-Israeli Conflict]. New York: Columbia University Press {{ISBN|0-231-12978-5}}. In this book Fischbach discusses on forceful dispossession of Palestinian property by Israel</ref> The rights paradigm tended to stabilize the distribution of property holdings on the presumption that title had been lawfully acquired.

Property does not exist in isolation, and so property rights too.<ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.2307/795134|author=Sax, J. L.|year=1971|title=Takings, Private Property and Public Rights|journal=Yale Law Journal|volume=81|issue=2|pages=149–186|id=see pp. 149, 152|jstor=795134|url=http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/facpubs/1586}}</ref> Bryan claimed that property rights describe relations among people and not just relations between people and things<ref>{{harvnb|Singer|2000|p=6}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.2307/785533|author=Hohfeld, W.|year=1913|title=Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning I|journal=Yale Law Journal|volume=23|issue=1|pages=16–59|jstor=785533|url=https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2324&context=ylj}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|doi=10.2307/786270|author=Hohfeld, W.|year=1917|title=Some Fundamental Legal Conceptions as Applied in Judicial Reasoning II|journal=Yale Law Journal|volume=26|issue=8|pages=710–770|jstor=786270|s2cid=142251500 |url=http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/4378}}</ref><ref>Miunzer, S. R. (1990). A theory of property. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 17</ref><ref>Bryan, B. (2000). Property as Ontology: on Aboriginal and English Understandings of Property. Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence, 13, 3–31. In this article Bradley Bryan claimed that property is about much more than a set of legal relations: it is 'an expression of social relationships because it organizes people with respect to each other and their material environment' p. 4</ref><ref>Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, p. 7</ref> Singer holds that the idea that owners have no legal obligations to others wrongly supposes that property rights hardly ever conflict with other legally protected interests.<!-- the existence/importance of the "no obligation" claim needs a ref.--><ref>{{harvnb|Singer|2000|p=16}}</ref> Singer continues implying that [[legal realism|legal realists]] "did not take the character and structure of social relations as an important independent factor in choosing the rules that govern market life". Ethics of property rights begins with recognizing the vacuous nature of the notion of property.

===Intellectual property===
{{main|Intellectual property|Intellectual property rights}}
[[Intellectual property]] (IP) encompasses expressions of ideas, thoughts, codes, and information. "[[Intellectual property rights]]" (IPR) treat IP as a kind of [[real property]], subject to analogous protections, rather than as a reproducible good or service. Boldrin and Levine argue that "government does not ordinarily enforce monopolies for producers of other goods. This is because it is widely recognized that monopoly creates many social costs. Intellectual monopoly is no different in this respect. The question we address is whether it also creates social benefits commensurate with these social costs."<ref>{{harvnb|Boldrin|Levine|2008|p=10}}</ref>

International standards relating to intellectual property rights are enforced through [[Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights]]. In the US, IP other than [[copyright]]s is regulated by the [[United States Patent and Trademark Office]].

The [[US Constitution]] included the power to protect intellectual property, empowering the Federal government "to promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries".<ref name=steel>Steelman, A. Intellectual Property.{{harvnb|Hamowy|Kuznicki|Steelman|2008 |pp=249–250}}</ref> Boldrin and Levine see no value in such state-enforced monopolies stating, "we ordinarily think of innovative monopoly as an [[oxymoron]].<ref>Välimäki, M. (2005). The Rise of Open Source Licensing: A Challenge to the Use of Intellectual Property in the Software Industry. Helsinki: Turre Publishing {{ISBN|952-91-8769-6}}.</ref> Further, they comment, 'intellectual property' "is not like ordinary property at all, but constitutes a government grant of a costly and dangerous private monopoly over ideas. We show through theory and example that intellectual monopoly is not necessary for innovation and as a practical matter is damaging to growth, prosperity, and liberty".<ref name=steel/> Steelman defends patent monopolies, writing, "Consider prescription drugs, for instance. Such drugs have benefited millions of people, improving or extending their lives. Patent protection enables drug companies to recoup their development costs because for a specific period of time they have the sole right to manufacture and distribute the products they have invented."<ref>{{harvnb|Hamowy|Kuznicki|Steelman|2008|p=249}}</ref> The court cases by 39 pharmaceutical companies against [[South Africa]]'s 1997 Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Act, which intended to provide affordable HIV medicines has been cited as a harmful effect of patents.<ref>[http://academic.udayton.edu/Health/06world/africa01.htm The South African Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Bill and TRIPS] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110807080930/http://academic.udayton.edu/Health/06world/africa01.htm |date=2011-08-07 }}. Academic.udayton.edu. Retrieved on 2010-09-02.</ref><ref>Orsi, F., Camara, M., & Coriat, B. (2006). AIDS, TRIPS and 'TRIPS plus': the case for developing and less developed countries. {{harvnb|Andersen|2006|pp=70–108}}</ref><!-- Isn't the ethical issue not the existence of patents, but the misuse of them in the above circumstance? -->

One attack on IPR is moral rather than utilitarian, claiming that inventions are mostly a collective, cumulative, path dependent, social creation and therefore, no one person or firm should be able to monopolize them even for a limited period.<ref>{{harvnb|Andersen|2006|pp=109–147}}</ref> The opposing argument is that the benefits of innovation arrive sooner when patents encourage innovators and their investors to increase their commitments.

Roderick T. Long, a [[libertarianism|libertarian]] philosopher, argued:

{{Blockquote|Ethically, property rights of any kind have to be justified as extensions of the right of individuals to control their own lives. Thus any alleged property rights that conflict with this moral basis—like the "right" to own slaves—are invalidated. In my judgment, intellectual property rights also fail to pass this test. To enforce copyright laws and the like is to prevent people from making peaceful use of the information they possess. If you have acquired the information legitimately (say, by buying a book), then on what grounds can you be prevented from using it, reproducing it, trading it? Is this not a violation of the freedom of speech and press? It may be objected that the person who originated the information deserves ownership rights over it. But information is not a concrete thing an individual can control; it is universal, existing in other people's minds and other people's property, and over these, the originator has no legitimate sovereignty. You cannot own information without owning other people.<ref>Roderick Long in {{harvnb|Hamowy|Kuznicki|Steelman|2008|pp=249–250}}</ref>}}

Machlup concluded that patents do not have the intended effect of enhancing innovation.<ref>Machlup, F. (1958). An Economic Review of the Patent System. Washington D.C.: US Government Printing Office, p. 80. Expressing similar concern Fritz Machlup wrote, "It would be irresponsible, on the basis of our present knowledge of its economic consequences, to recommend instituting [a patent system]."</ref> Self-declared [[anarchist]] [[Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|Proudhon]], in his 1847 seminal work noted, "Monopoly is the natural opposite of competition," and continued, "Competition is the vital force which animates the collective being: to destroy it, if such a supposition were possible, would be to kill society."<ref>Proudhon (1847), [http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/philosophy/ch06.htm Chapter Virgin Islands] in The Philosophy of Poverty.</ref><ref>The [[Sherman Antitrust Act|Sherman Act]] of 1890, was passed in America to stop rampant cartelization and monopolization in the American economy, followed by the [[Clayton Antitrust Act|Clayton Act]] of 1914, [[Federal Trade Commission Act]] of 1914,[https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/15/usc_sup_01_15_10_2_20_I.html] and the [[Robinson-Patman Act|Anti-Price Discrimination Act]] of 1936. In recent years, "[[antitrust]]" enforcement is alleged to have reduced competition. E.g., "antitrust is anticompetitive" writes Boudreaux Antitrust.{{harvnb|Hamowy|Kuznicki|Steelman|2008|pp=16}}</ref>

Mindeli and Pipiya argued that the [[knowledge economy]] is an economy of abundance<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mindeli|first1=L. E.|last2=Pipiya|first2=L. K.|title=Conceptual aspects of formation of a knowledge-based economy|journal=Studies on Russian Economic Development|volume=18|page=314|year=2007|doi=10.1134/S1075700707030100|issue=3|s2cid=154185640}}</ref> because it relies on the "infinite potential" of knowledge and ideas rather than on the limited resources of natural resources, labor and capital. Allison envisioned an egalitarian distribution of knowledge.<ref>{{Cite book|author=R. Allison |date=30 December 2005| chapter= The Birth of Spiritual Economics|editor = L. Zsolnai | title= Spirituality and Ethics in Management|series=Issues in Business Ethics| volume= 19| pages= 61–74| location= New York| publisher= Springer |issn = 0925-6733 | isbn=978-1-4020-2365-1 }}</ref>  Kinsella claimed that IPR create artificial scarcity and reduce equality.<ref>Kinsella, S. (2008). [https://books.google.com/books?id=og0OkSwUnUQC&pg=PA32 Against Intellectual Property]. Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute. Kinsella writes, "Ideas are not naturally scarce. However, by recognizing a right in an ideal object, one creates scarcity where none existed before" p. 33.</ref><ref>{{harvnb|Andersen|2006|p=125}}</ref><ref>David, P. (2001, 22–23 January). Will Building 'Good Fences' Really Make 'Good Neighbours'. Paper presented at the Science, report to European Commission (DG-Research) STRATA-ETAN workshop on IPR aspects of internal collaborations, Brussels.</ref> Bouckaert wrote, "Natural scarcity is that which follows from the relationship between man and nature. Scarcity is natural when it is possible to conceive of it before any human, institutional, contractual arrangement. Artificial scarcity, on the other hand, is the outcome of such arrangements. Artificial scarcity can hardly serve as a justification for the legal framework that causes that scarcity. Such an argument would be completely circular. On the contrary, artificial scarcity itself needs a justification"<ref>Bouckaert, B (1990). "What is Property?" In "Symposium: Intellectual Property." Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 13(3) p. 793</ref> Corporations fund much IP creation and can acquire IP they do not create,<ref>Macmillan, F. (2006). Public interest and the public domain in an era of corporate dominance. {{harvnb|Andersen|2006|pp=46–69}}</ref> to which Menon and others have objected.<ref>{{harvnb|Drahos|Braithwaite|2002}}</ref> Andersen claims that IPR has increasingly become an instrument in eroding public domain.<ref>{{harvnb|Andersen|2006|pp=63}}</ref>

Ethical and legal issues include [[patent infringement]], [[copyright infringement]], [[trademark infringement]], [[patent misuse|patent]] and [[copyright misuse]], [[submarine patent]]s, [[biological patent]]s, [[patent troll|patent]], [[copyright troll|copyright]] and [[trademark troll]]ing, [[employee raiding]] and monopolizing talent, [[bioprospecting]], [[biopiracy]] and [[industrial espionage]], [[digital rights management]].

Notable IP copyright cases include ''[[A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.]]'', ''[[Eldred v. Ashcroft]]'', and [[Disney]]'s lawsuit against the [[Air Pirates]].