Bitcoins: Mt. Gox Collapse (2014)

Controversy

Bitcoin logo

What in the world are Bitcoins? It is the biggest and most popular type of virtual currency today. Essentially it is digital money, a new medium of exchange not backed by any sort of national or governmental group. It is the first decentralized peer to peer network powered only by the users. Bitcoins are self regulating and all the Bitcoin users make up a tiny fraction of the total. This means there are no need for banks, they can not be taxed, and all transactions are anonymous. Bitcoins have been ever increasing in popularity over the years since originally created anonymously in 2009.
The creator of Bitcoins was clever creating the Bitcoin under an alias named Satoshi Nakamoto, making Bitcoins anonymity ubiquitous. The overall design of the Bitcoins roots back to gold. There is a finite amount of gold on the earth to be mined. So at first when people start mining large amounts of gold will be found but this exponentially decays over time because it will become harder to find. Once all the gold has been mined there can only be that maximum amount in circulation at one time. Bitcoins were created in the same way, there can be only a finite number of bitcoins in circulation at one time. However the only difference, is the method for obtaining them. In both situations the act of obtaining gold or bitcoins is called mining. The way people are able to mine for bitcoins is by using Bitcoin software, which is free. This can be downloaded on any computer or a network of computers and is run to solve complex math problems. Solving one of these problems is the equivalent to striking gold! So the person or group of people that solved the problem will be rewarded with their share of bitcoins. The difficulty of the problem increases based on the amount of time they are being solved in leading to this exponential decay. The current amount of bitcoins in circulation is roughly 12.4 million. The last bitcoin is projected to be mined in the year 2140 bringing the permanent amount in circulation to just under 21 million. Every Bitcoin transaction from creation to present is publicly available. The value of a Bitcoin is highly flexible and fluctuates often, making it dependent on the exchanges.
Another way Bitcoins can be obtained is through an exchange. Now that there is a large amount in circulation, Bitcoin exchanges have been allowing customers to exchange their native currency for Bitcoins and vice versa. For example an American could want to make and exchange for 3 bitcoins. This person would have pay the amount in US dollars equivalent to receive the 3 bitcoins. The largest and most widely known Bitcoin exchange was Mt. Gox out of Japan. Mt. Gox launched in the summer of 2010 and by 2013 was responsible for seventy percent of all Bitcoin transactions. Mt. Gox was functioning as a mix between an online brokerage and a exchange. As Mt. Gox reached its peak it had more than one million traders entrusting their money to be held safely by them. A twenty eight year old french men named Karpeles acquired the exchange from American entrepreneur Jed McCaleb. McCaleb realized he had bit off more than he could chew when people were wiring tens of thousands of dollars through his exchange at a time. This lead him to the decision of selling Mt. Gox. Karpeles was an excellent programmer and set out to rewriting the sites software eventually turning it into the most popular Bitcoin exchange in the world. The site was taken offline for several days in June of 2011 due to a hack. The response to this attack was aided by Bitcoin enthusiast, Karpeles and Mt. Gox ended up making good on their obligations.
Early in the following year of 2012 a small group of company employees began to worry that customers funds were being used to cover the estimated rise of operating costs of the company. Karpeles was the only one who had access to Mt. Gox's financial records. Based on their own estimates they felt Mt. Gox was spending more money then it was taking in. Also flags were raised that the company's expenses were being payed from the same bank account that was used for customer deposits. It became all to real for Mt. Gox in 2013 when the company had to suspend withdrawals in US dollars from the system for nearly two weeks. Startled by this course of action people began backing out of the company, taking what money they had left and running. Mt. Gox no longer had the funds necessary to return deposits.
This chain reaction of events lead Karpeles to admit the loses and apologize. Mt. Gox filed for bankruptcy on February 28, 2014 and also said that hackers may have exploited a bug in the Bitcoin system. This was the explanation for the disappearance of 460 million US dollars in Bitcoins. However failed to explain where the twenty seven million in cash had gone. The size of the loss is remarkable and with no legal recourse or financial system if the criminal successfully gets the bitcoins they are technically in his ownership. Karpeles was the only person at Mt. Gox who had access to the bank accounts and each withdrawal request was done manually. Mt. Gox was said to have owed 1.3 million Bitcoin traders 55 million US dollars based on deposits it had taken. These investors are still left without their money and may never get it back. The site has been taken down and is no longer active, also Karpeles has resigned from his position with the Bitcoin Foundation which is the virtual currency's top advocacy group.
Using the four main ethical theories, Individualism, Utilitarianism, Kantianism and Virtue theory the case of Mt. Gox's collapse will be analyzed. Mt. Gox's and CEO Karpeles's actions will be seen as unethical according to these four theories.

Individualism

Protestor demanding their money from Mt. Gox

Individualism states that the main goal of a business is to maximize profit for the stakeholders. Mt. Gox was able to do just that at first. They were the most popular Bitcoin exchange in the world at the time. Over seventy percent of all bitcoin transactions took place with Mt. Gox. Business was booming and at its peak a bitcoin hit the one thousand dollar mark. However this did not last and Mt. Gox was spending more money than it was ultimately bringing in and for any business this is just bad. Mt. Gox was losing money fast due to an exploit of the Bitcoin system from hackers. Having had millions of dollars worth of bitcoins siphoned off Mt. Gox was under water and had to admit defeat. Mt. Gox would be seen as unethical in it actions by a individualist because even though at first they sought maximizing profit as a main goal they failed to do so. In the end they had to file for bankruptcy and lost millions of their customers money.

UtilitarianismUtilitarianism main intent is to make everyone happy and wants to do so for the over all good. Mt. Gox intentions were self involved and mainly due to CEO Mark Karpeles actions. He was not a business man and could not manage the company properly. He used Mt. Gox to make only himself happy rather than everyone. When hacked in 2011 Karpeles took no course of action to further protect the customers bitcoins. Karpeles spent his time else where rather then properly managing Mt. Gox he was uninterested with he business side of things and this hurt them badly. He obsessed over creating this Bitcoin cafe that would be stylish hangout in the same building as Mt. Gox offices. This was all during the slow but sure downfall of the company. This is unethical to a Utilitarian because the intent was not to make everyone happy little was done to better or save the company until it was too late.

Kantianism Kantianism is based upon making rational decision and allowing others to do the same for themselves. There is no lying or deceit of any kind and the use of people without their rational consent. Never treating the situation as mere means but rather always as an end. Mt. Gox treated their costumers as mere means and exploited their false sense of trust in the company. They were using customers funds to pay for their own business expenses. Also with held all information of the disappearance of millions of dollars until they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Instead of letting their customers make informed rational decision on their own, what they would like to do with their money, they simply decided for them. Mt. Gox froze all withdrawals and transactions on the website for their own personal benefit regardless of how this affected the customers. The loss of 460 million dollars worth of bitcoins has yet to be found, leaving customers asking Mt. Gox where their money is. This is impermissible and the actions Mark Karpeles took with Mt. Gox seen by a Kantian are unethical.

Virtue Theory

Mt. Gox Company logo

Virtue Theory focuses on four main characteristics, courage, honesty, self control and fairness. A business must act with he interest of these characteristics in mind. They must be willing to take a stand for the right ideas and actions. Honest in agreements, treatment of employees and with customers. Expectations and desires must be with in reason. Finally they must work hard, produce quality, have good ideas and fair in their practices. Mt. Gox was courageous after the 2011 hacking because they were able to overcome it unlike where all other exchanges simply threw in the towel. This was impressive and gained the respect of many Bitcoin supporters. This was able to slingshot Mt. Gox forward into the largest most reputable Bitcoin exchange worldwide. However in order to be seen as ethical by a virtue theorist they must meet all four of the main characteristics. Mt. Gox was not honest, actually quite the opposite, they were deceitful and used their customers to make up for their own mistakes. They also lacked self control because their expenses were fair exceeding their profits. What ever expectations for the company Karpeles had seen to grow and expand were not with in reason if money was being over spent. Finally Mt. Gox was unfair to their customers who entrusted their money with the company. The believed it would be safe guarded rather than spend to keep Mt. Gox above water. Analyzed from a Virtue Theorist Mt. Got acted unethically in this situation.


References

Cox, Cate. "Bitcoin: What The Heck Is It, And How Does It Work?." Consumerist. N.p., 4 Mar. 2014.
Web. 31 Mar. 2014. http://consumerist.com/2014/03/04/bitcoin-what-the-heck-is-it-and-how-does-it-work/.

Hern, Alex. "How a bug in bitcoin led to MtGox's collapse." theguardian.com. Guardian News and Media, 27 Feb. 2014. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/27/how-does-a-bug-in-bitcoin-lead-to-mtgoxs-collapse.

Knight, Sophie, and Nathan Layne. "Exclusive:  Mt. Gox faced questions on handling client cash long before crisis." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 29 Mar. 2014. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/30/us-bitcoin-mtgox-idUSBREA2T01T20140330.

McMillan, Robert . "The Inside Story of Mt. Gox, Bitcoin’s $460 Million Disaster | Enterprise | WIRED." Wired.com. Conde Nast Digital, 14 Mar. 2003. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. http://www.wired.com/2014/03/bitcoin-exchange/.

Pagliery, Jose. "Mt.Gox site disappears, Bitcoin future in doubt." CNNMoney. Cable News Network, 25 Feb. 2014. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/25/technology/security/mtgox-bitcoin/.

Timberg, Craig. "Mt. Gox collapse spurs calls to regulate Bitcoin." Washington Post. The Washington Post, 28 Feb. 2014. Web. 30 Mar. 2014. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/mt-gox-collapse-spurs-calls-to-regulate-bitcoin/2014/02/28/df44f5c6-a0b7-11e3-a050-dc3322a94fa7_story.html.


Weisenthal, Joe. "Here's The Answer To Paul Krugman's Difficult Question About Bitcoin." Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 30 Dec. 2013. Web. 1 Apr. 2014. http://www.businessinsider.com/why-bitcoin-has-value-2013-12.

Lance Armstrong: Doping Drugs (2013)

Controversy

Lance Armstrong, representing United States Postal Services

Lance Armstrong is a former professional American road racing cyclist. Armstrong was known for winning seven back to back races at the Tour de France. After all of his hard work and accomplishments Armstrong got diagnosed with testicular cancer. Although this was a big set back for Armstrong it did not stop him from achieving his goals, it only made him better. Armstrong soon after becoming cancer-free created his own foundation, the Livestrong Foundation. The Livestrong Foundation was originally called the Lance Armstrong Foundation which provides support to cancer patients. After becoming cancer-free Armstrong changed his sponsor from Motorola to US Postal and then onto TailWind. In 2005 after his seventh win in the Tour de France Armstrong announced his retirement. It was only three years until Armstrong decided to race again. Armstrong participated in many races year after year until 2011 when he declared that he was retiring 'for good'. Throughout Armstrong's career he faced persistent allegations of doping. Armstrong denied all allegations of doping by explaining that throughout his cycling career he had never once come up positive in a drug test. Armstrong continued to deny the use of any performance-enhancing drugs for four consecutive years. In October 2013, the US Anti-Doping Agency released over 1000 pages of evidence that proved Armstrong guilty of doping drugs. After getting caught Armstrong was stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and the International Olympic Committee demanded Armstrong to give back his bronze metal that he had won in 2000. The drugs that the US Anti-Doping Agency found that were used by Armstrong were Blood Doping, Corticosteroids, and Testosterone. He used blood doping to enhance his red blood cells which gave him extra oxygen in his muscles, improving recovery and endurance. Corticosteriod's is a man-made drug that resembles the natural hormone Cortisol. He used this drug to decrease any pain that he had in his body so that he could preform with maximum strength. The last drug he used was Testosterone which helped him get stronger and bulk up. While wearing US Postal's colors and logo Armstrong was using doping drugs to help him win the races. Although one would think that Armstrong screwed over USPS by doing the drugs he actually did the opposite because he did more enhancing to the brand than harm. Armstrong also did damages to his own foundation, Livestrong Foundation. Armstrong was prompted to resign from chairman of the foundation. Now the question is if Livestrong Foundation can live without him. As of now Livestrong Foundation has been surviving without Armstrong but they did get dropped by Nike.

Individualism

LiveStrong Foundation logo

In Does Business Ethics Make Sense, a PowerPoint made by Professor Salazar she discusses the true meaning of individualism. "The only goal of business is to profit, so the only obligation that the business person has is to maximize profit for the owner or the stakeholders"(Salazar 12), this quote was said by Milton Friedman discussing his own view on individualism. Salazar believes, "Everyone has the right to pursue his own interests and should do so, but no one has the right to make other people's choices about their pursuits for them"(Salazar 11). Individualism relates to the Lance Armstrong doping drugs case in multiple ways. Armstrong had the right to make his own decisions regarding doping drugs or not doping drugs.
By him doping drugs he only benefited himself and nobody else on his team or his sponsors. Armstrong did not play by the rules when it came to going against the company that sponsored him. He only thought about the outcome and the things that he could get out of winning seven Tour de France races. Due to Armstrong's selfish actions he got his own foundation, Livestrong Foundation, in a lot of trouble. The foundation worked with Nike throughout the years to make products to raise money for cancer. After Armstrong admitted to breaking the rules and doping drugs Nike stopped working with the foundation. Armstrong did not once think about the effect that he would have on his own foundation because he did what he thought he had the right to do.

Utilitarianism
The true definition of utilitarianism is to maximize happiness for yourself and others. Armstrong did show utilitarianism but he only maximized happiness for himself not others. He enjoyed winning races and getting metals but did not care about the effect that it would have on his team and sponsors. After first doping drugs and winning his first Tour de France Armstrong did not want to go back. He admitted in an interview that he does not believe that he would have won all seven of the Tour de France races if he had not been doping drugs. Winning made him happy but the effects that it had on his teammates was not good. Everyone goes into a race wanting to win and get a metal but there are slim chances of that happening. Each racer is supposed to have an equal opportunity going into the race but Armstrong made that impossible. The only positive thing that Armstrong did that made everyone happy was by wearing US Postal's logo and colors he enhanced the brand in surprisingly a good way. Overall what Lance Armstrong did just harmed himself and all of the accomplishments he made were taken away from him.

Kantianism

EPO, a hormone Armstrong used to assist his endurance

The Kantianism theory is the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. The theory has four basic principles which were shown in Professor Salazar's PowerPoint. These principles are, to act rationally- do not act inconsistently in your own actions or consider yourself exempt from rules, allow and help people to make rational decisions, respect people and their individual needs and differences, and be motivated by good will seeking to do what is right because it is right. The first principle relates to this case perfectly, Armstrong did not act rationally at all, he believed that he would never get caught for doping drugs so he exempt himself from the rules of the race. Although in the beginning it was Armstrong's idea to do the drugs once his teammates saw that he was doing so well they did not help him make rational decisions, they did the complete opposite. Everyone that knew he had been doping drugs allowed him to keep doing it and did not tell anyone. One of the main differences that Armstrong had that other racers did not was that he had cancer at one point in his life. Nobody thought that such a good innocent guy would do such terrible things. The foundation that Armstrong made donated money to find the cure to cancer. This made Armstrong seem like a great guy because he was helping others and not just racing for himself when in reality he was going against the rules to win. Lastly, Armstrong was not motivated in any way by good will, because he did not do what was right because it was right. Armstrong was motivated to win and he would do anything to do so which is why he got into doping drugs. Not only did Armstrong hurt himself in the end he hurt many people who were supporting him and rooting for him to win the races.

Virtue Theory

As shown in the PowerPoint Business Ethics and Virtue written by Professor Salazar, the definition of the virtue theory is "the characteristics that allow things to function properly"(Salazar 4). There are four main virtues in business which are courage, honest, temperance, and justice. The definition of courage is the quality of mind or spirt that enables a person to face difficulty without fear.

Conclusion

Lance Armstrong did not show courage because he was not able to race without the doping drugs because he was afraid that he would not be able to win without the drugs. Although he did not have courage in himself, his sponsor's did have courage in him because the entire time they were believing that he won the races fair and square. Honesty is defined as being honorable in principles intentions and actions; being fair. Armstrong was the complete opposite of honest, his entire career and all of his accomplishments were lies. Everyone in the world believed that Armstrong was able to win on his own and they supported him with buying items from his foundation and by doing other things. Even Armstrong's teammates were not honest because once they found out about the drugs they did nothing to stop him. The definition of temperance is reasonable expectations and desires. Armstrong did have reasonable expectations and desires but the only way he believed that he could win the race was by doping drugs. Armstrong was known as one of the best racers and due to that he had many different sponsors that he was screwing over. He went against the racing rules during the Tour de France and showed unethical behavior by doping drugs. Justice is the hard work, quality of the products, good ideas, and fair practices. Armstrong's goals were intact and his sponsors believed in him. US Postal sponsored Armstrong and used their own money to give him things to allow him to race to his best ability. They put a lot of hard work into sponsoring Armstrong just to get let down in the end. Armstrong went against all ethical things and convinced himself that it was right and that he would never get caught.


References

"Lance Armstrong Biography." Bio.com. A&E Networks Television, n.d. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://www.biography.com/people/lance-armstrong-9188901>.

"Lance Armstrong: 'Impossible' to Win Tour De France without Doping." USA Today. Gannett, 28 June 2013. Web. 01 Apr. 2014. <http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2013/06/28/lance-armstrong-impossible-win-tour-de-france-doping/2471413/>.

Suddath, Claire. "Can Livestrong Live Without Lance?" Bloomberg Business Week. Bloomberg, 24 Oct. 2012. Web. 01 Apr. 2014. <http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-24/can-livestrong-live-without-lance>.

Wieners, Brad. "Lance Armstrong Lied, Cheated, Doped, but Does He Really Owe Damages?" Bloomberg Business Week. Bloomberg, 24 Apr. 2013. Web. 01 Apr. 2014.<http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-04-24/lance-armstrong-lied-cheated-doped-but-does-he-really-owe-damages>.

Wilson, Jacque. "Lance Armstrong's Doping Drugs." CNN. Cable News Network, 18 Jan. 2013. Web. 01 Apr. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/15/health/armstrong-ped-explainer/>.

Kevin Trudeau: Deceiving Customers (2014)

Controversy

Kevin Trudeau's book

Kevin Trudeau is a 50-year old man who has been in and out of federal prison since the early 1990's. His last scheme was tricking customers, using his popular infomercials, for his self-help book, "The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About", released in 2009. Trudeau has sold about 850,000 of his self-help, weight-loss book which produced an estimate of $39 million. In addition to this scheme, in 2004, Kevin Trudeau was given a court order that prohibited him from running false ads relating to the weight-loss book. However, Trudeau defied the court order and allegedly aired the infomercials at least 32,000 times. Due to this act of defiance related to the court order, Trudeau's lawyer's request of a sentence of two years was denied, and a sentence of ten years in federal prison on Monday, March 18, 2014 was given. Trudeau has also been investigated for his other books, such as "Natural Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About" and "Debt Cures "They" Don't Want You to Know About". In "The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About", Kevin Trudeau depicted an enduring, difficult, 500 calories a day diet, which also included hormone treatment. However, what was written in his book, and what was said on the infomercials, were two completely different ideas. In Trudeau's infomercials, he claimed that his book was "a simple, no hunger...diet-free method of losing weight" (Associated Press). This fabrication is what led to the lawsuit; many people were tricked into buying the book because Trudeau made it seem the process was simple and easy in the infomercials, but in the book, Trudeau wrote about a demanding diet. Therefore, Trudeau cheated thousands of customers and robbed them of millions of dollars in total.

Individualism
The Individualist Theory's goal is to act within the best interest of their stakeholders, and maximize profit for them, within constraints of the law. In addition, the Individualist Theory also believes in respecting other's rights to pursue their own choices and options. It is obvious that Kevin Trudeau did not act in the best interest of his customers and did not maximize the profits for the stakeholders at all. Trudeau did not act within the best interest of his stakeholders, or in this case his customers, because deceiving your customers out of millions of dollars and lying to them, is not part of the Individualistic Theory. Trudeau was more focused on the profit that he was going to make, instead of acting in the best interest for his customers. In addition, Trudeau did not act within the constraints of the law, what he did was illegal, and ethically wrong. When he lied during his infomercials, he did not have the best interest of anyone in mind, relative to the profits of the customers or the best interest for them; he was only concerned with himself. If Trudeau did have the best interest of his customers and stakeholders in mind, he would not have cheated people out of their money, and would not have lied to them; he would have been truthful and did what was best for them, not himself.

Utilitarianism

Trudeau advertising his book after court prohibits such infomercials

According to the Utilitarianism Theory, an action is considered ethical if it promotes happiness to the majority of the people. People should be maximizing happiness in themselves and others. The Utilitarianism Theory also concludes that happiness is the only thing that is valuable, and how the actions hurt, or are beneficial to the people involved, such as the customers and stakeholders. The buyers of the book, "The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About" were not happy about Trudeau's actions, hence the reason the lawsuit was brought on. The customers were displeased when they watched the infomercials and believed that the book provided by a pain-free diet and easy way to lose weight, and then found out when they purchased and read the book, that the book completely contradicted what was said in the infomercials that aired. There were no benefits regarding the stakeholders or customers in this scheme. Customers lost money and were cheated, therefore, only harm came to the stakeholders and customers. No one was happy regarding the lies the book and Trudeau proclaimed, which presumes this action as unethical.

Kantianism
Another business ethic theory called Kantianism, believes that every duty or action is performed out of good will. An action must not be done for any selfish reasons, and it must be done without your self-interest in mind in order for it to be deemed ethical. Kantian's believe that one must do something, or perform an action, because it is the right thing to do, not because you know it's the right thing to do or you think you will get some kind of prize or reward for doing it. In addition, it is a rule in the business world that a company or business owner should always be truthful and honest with their customers and employees. However, there was nothing ethical about Trudeau's actions. The only results from Trudeau's actions benefited him. Trudeau did not tell the truth to his customers and nothing good came from his actions. The customers did not benefit at all from any of his duties and actions, and everything he did was based on selfish reasons. Trudeau wanted more money, so he lied in his infomercial to wrongly promote his book so that more people would buy it. Additionally, he swindled people out of their money by not giving them the right information they need in order to healthfully lose weight, so for almost every customer, it was a waste of money. When Trudeau performed these actions, the only interest he had in his mind was himself, and there was no good will involved. His actions were done for selfish reasons and was not performed for the good of the people, which based on Kantianism, means his actions were unethical.

Virtue Theory

Trudeau has been in federal prison
since the 1990s after robbing millions

 
 The Virtue Theory is the fourth business ethics theory. It consists of four components which include courage, honesty, temperance, and justice. In order for the business to be ethical under the Virtue theory, all four of these characteristics must be present. The courage trait represents the ability and risk-taking means to take a stand for the right ideas. Trudeau did take a risk by lying to his customers and putting inconsistent information in the infomercials and the book, but it was not for right or moral reasons. Trudeau was selfish and just wanted money and fame. The second trait of the virtue theory is honesty. Honesty is being truthful with everyone in the business, such as employees and customers. Trudeau was not honest with his customers in the infomercials and the contents of his book. He tricked people into believing the infomercials contained accurate descriptions and summaries as to what was in the book, however, it was not, and people lost money by buying the book; they did not get what they thought they were paying for. Temperance is the third trait of the Virtue theory. Temperance means the business has to have realistic expectations and desires. Trudeau did have expectations and desires, which consisted of maximizing only his profit and hoping no one caught him. Although these desires and expectations may not seem realistic or sensible to most people, or sounds risky, Trudeau thought he could get away with it, which for this reason, is why he went along with it. The last trait of Virtue theory is justice. Justice is hard work, quality products, good ideas, and fair practices. Some may argue that Trudeau worked hard on his book, and that may have been true, however, his "hard work" was not fair to customers and workers and that is not something that I think can be overlooked because he clearly has not learned his lesson, even though he has been doing this for several years. The book was not a quality product because many people complained about it and were very unsatisfied with the results, which also ties along with the good idea aspect of justice. If he thought his book was such a good idea, then why did Trudeau think he had to lie on his infomercials to get more customers? As a result of these traits, since not all four were met, Kevin Trudeau actions were unethical under the Virtue theory as well.

References

Associated Press. "TV Pitchman Kevin Trudeau Sentenced to 10 Years in Federal Prison for Bilking Customers." Fox News. FOX News Network, 18 Mar. 2014. Web. 30 Mar. 2014

Hill, James. "Kevin Trudeau: Chasing the Dream Seller." ABC News. ABC News Network, 29 May 2013. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.

Salazar, Heather. Business Ethics Lectures. WNEU. Spring 2014.

Salazar, Heather. “Kantian Business Ethics,” in Business in Ethical Focus, ed. Fritz Allhoff and Anand J. Vaidya (Broadview Press, 2008).

Pfizer: Defense of Bextra & Celebrex (2013)

Pfizer logo

Controversy

Starting in 2006 Pfizer has been under fire from stockholders and consumers over concerns about its painkillers Bextra and Celebrex.  Both drugs are anti-inflammatory drugs most notably prescribed for arthritis relief.  In 2004 the pharmaceutical company Merck pulled their similar drug, Vioxx, from the market due to concerns over increased chances of stroke and heart attack in consumers using Vioxx.  This began to stir up concerns over Pfizer's Bextra and Celebrex due to their similar purpose and chemical make-up.  Bextra would eventually be pulled from the market and, in 2008, Pfizer would spend almost $900 million to settle all lawsuits related to Bextra.  Then in 2009 Pfizer would settle a whistle-blower case against them over Bextra for close to $2 billion.  That same year a shareholder lawsuit would be brought against Pfizer for misrepresenting the dangers of Celebrex and for cherry-picking data from clinical trials to help promote Celebrex.  This lawsuit from 2010 is still going on despite Pfizer's attempts to dismiss the case in March 2013.  This case is the most significant because of the allegations against Pfizer: that Celebrex was wrongly advertised to be easier on the heart and stomach than other arthritis drugs.  Evidence presented for this lawsuit has shown that Pfizer willingly took the data from the first half of their clinical trials to show that Celebrex was better at preventing gastrointestinal injuries.  The entire trial showed that this was not the case and so the marketing of Celebrex was intentionally misleading, both to investors and consumers.  The stakeholders for this case is Pfizer (along with its partner Pharamcia), the investors (involved in the lawsuit(s)), and consumers that were prescribed Celebrex and Bextra in the early 2000s.  Pfizer's intent and actions will be analyzed using four ethical theories: Individualist Theory, Utilitarianism, Kantianism, and Virtue Theory. 

Individualism
Individualist theory states that the primary goal for a business is to generate profit for its employees and investors. However profit must be gained while still respecting laws and human rights. Pfizer chose to make the most profit by advertising a "safer" arthritis drug with Celebrex and Bextra. The first half of their year-long study of Celebrex showed a possible decrease in gastrointestinal injury. Pfizer chose to use this data set to help promote Celebrex to consumers and investors. But the rest of the clinical trial showed that this decrease was no better than other COX-2 inhibitors on the market, yet Pfizer chose to say otherwise. This shows that while Pfizer was using misinformation to promote Celebrex, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had approved the use of Celebrex and its inclusion in the market. Pfizer intentionally misled the public in the safety of Celebrex and Bextra. This misinformation eventually led to Bextra being pulled from the market but Celebrex is still available today. When held up to Individualist virtues, Pfizer has acted unethically by misleading the people in their right to know. 

Utilitarianism

10mg bottle of Bextra

Utilitarianism states that happiness is the most important aspect of ethics. In other words, if an action brings happiness then it is ethical. At first Pfizer may have wanted to help arthritis sufferers but the dangers of the drug outweigh the benefits. Consumers have an increased risk of stroke, heart attacks, and other heart and stomach complications from taking Celebrex and Bextra. While these two drugs may have benefited people at first, if complications arise then their quality of life drastically changes (if they do not contribute to killing them first). For a Utilitarianist this is unacceptable. The multitude of lawsuits against Pfizer for Bextra -- and their tremendous settlement payouts -- show how unhappy investors and consumers are with Pfizer for how they presented the drug.

Kantianism

100mg and 200mg boxes of Celebrex

Kantianism states that companies should intrinsically want to help consumers and allow them to make informed decisions. It also states that companies should always work within the boundaries and never feel exempt from rules and regulations. Pfizer did not intrinsically want to help consumers; if they did they would have waited for the entirety of their clinical trial before marketing the drugs. Pfizer was not going to allow consumers to make well-informed decisions by withholding the dangers of the drugs and by having an apparently superior anti-inflammatory drug compared to others on the market. Their deception prevented consumers from looking at other similar drugs if those drugs could not promote a decreased risk in abdominal health. Pfizer also was not playing by the rules in their advertising. Other than the cherry-picked data from their trial run, documents show that marketers and advertisers for Pfizer were trying to come up with ways to explain away the rest of the trial run. Investors were being brought in on the credentials of Celebrex despite it being no better than other arthritis drugs. Pfizer fails under these Kantian principles.

Virtue Theory

Ian C. Read, CEO of Pfizer

Virtue Theory has four main virtues: courage, honesty, self-control, and fairness. A company is courageous if it takes chances and stands up for what is right. A company is honest if it is transparent with its business actions. A company shows self-control if they create reasonable expectations and lives up to those expectations. A company is fair if it works hard and follows fair practices. Pfizer certainly took a chance in using unconfirmed data to promote their drugs but in doing so they did not stand up for what is right. Their own actions were shrouded from investors. They were hardly transparent by hiding the fact they were using wrong information in advertising. Pfizer, as a company, had created reasonable expectations that the drugs they sold would be safe but failed to live up to those expectations with the complications that arise from using Bextra and Celebrex. Pfizer was hardly fair in how they promoted the drugs by allowing wrong information to be used. Pfizer has gone against all of these virtues in how they marketed Bextra and Celebrex.

Conclusion
Pfizer has certainly shown how they value ethics in how they promoted Celebrex and Bextra. They failed to follow the four virtues in Virtue Theory, they deceived consumers under Kantianism, they brought unhappiness to consumers and investors under Utilitarianism, and failed to operate within rules and regulations under Individualism. It is interesting to note that Bextra has been removed from the market but Celebrex has not. Pfizer may just be trying to stay competitive by having at least one arthritis drug on the market and are thus aggressively protecting it. This can cause Pfizer to plummet even further down on their ethical principles if they cannot end up settling things and ensuring a better, safer drug.


References
Bratulic, Anna. "Pfizer Loses Bid to Dismiss Shareholder Lawsuit over Celebrex, Bextra Safetyclaims." - FirstWord Pharma. First World Pharma, 29 Mar. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Mercola. "Pfizer 'Cherry-Picked' Celebrex Data, Memos Say." Mercola.com. N.p., 9 July 2012. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Phillips & Cohen LLP. "Bextra Whistleblower Case Leads to Record-setting Pfizer Settlement." Phillips & Cohen LLP. N.p., 2 Sept. 2009. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Raymond, Nate, and Ransdell Pierson. "Pfizer to Pay $164 Million in Investor Lawsuit over Celebrex." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 09 Oct. 2012. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Saul, Stephanie. "Pfizer in $894 Million Drug Settlement." The New York Times. The New York Times, 17 Oct. 2008. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Stempel, Jonathan. "Pfizer Fails to End Lawsuit over Bextra, Celebrex Safety." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 28 Mar. 2013. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Thomas, Katie. "In Documents on Pain Drug, Signs of Doubt and Deception." The New York Times. The New York Times, 24 June 2012. Web. 28 Mar. 2014.

Bernie Madoff: Greatest Ponzi Scheme in U.S. History

The Issue Itself

Many people have heard of Bernie Madoff and the Ponzi scheme that he ran which was said to be the biggest in U.S. history.  But many people do not know how he started or what he did to actually be one of the prestige firms on Wall Street.  During his early years he attended the University of Alabama but one year later he transferred to Hofstra University which was much closer to his home in Queens, New York.  The next year, Madoff earned his bachelor's degree in political science from Hofstra.  Madoff studied law at Brooklyn Law School but quit later that year to start his own investment firm using $5000 to start it up which he saved from his prior job of a lifeguard and a side job installing sprinkler systems.  With the help of is father-in-law Madoff and his wife started Madoff Investment Securities, LLC.  Madoff was able to pull in big time clients like Stephen Spielberg and Kevin Bacon.  Madoff Investment Securities grew famous for its reliable annual returns of 10 percent or more and, by the 1980s, his firm handled up to 5 percent of the trading on the New York Stock Exchange. 

Madoff planned on giving out a few million dollar bonus checks two months earlier than scheduled and immediately his two sons questioned where all of the money came from.  He then admitted to them that a branch of his firm was actually an elaborate Ponzi scheme. Madoff's sons reported their father to federal authorities, and the next day Madoff was arrested and charged with securities fraud.  Madoff also reportedly told investigators that he lost $50 billion dollars of his investors’ money and pled guilty to 11 felony charges including securities fraud, investment adviser fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, three counts of money laundering, false statements, perjury, false filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and theft from an employee benefit plan.  To this day the extent of his fraud is still being uncovered and prosecutors are saying that $170 billion moved through the principal Madoff account over decades, and that before his arrest the firm's statements showed a total of $65 billion in accounts.  On June 29, 2009 Madoff was sentenced to 150 years in prison which was the maximum sentence.

Individualism

Individualism basically is the individual aspect of the person meaning that the focus is on those individuals’ beliefs and goals rather than a group or team.  They promote the individuals desires and self-interest as opposed to being group oriented and really focusing on that individual.  From the individualists point of view in this particular case Bernie Madoff was essentially right in what he was doing because he was doing what he had to maximize his profit and to help the business become a success.  However this can also be argued because in Individualism, especially Friedman's definition be argued because in Individualism, especially Friedman's definition of it, it states that the only obligation that the business person has is to maximize profit for the owner or the stockholders.  So clearly Madoff was not maximizing profit for his stockholders in fact he was deliberately taking their money and actually losing them a lot more than they thought.  Going back to just himself he was able to accomplish a lot for the company even if it was illegal.  He was able to make many billions of dollars not only for himself but his entire family who worked for him as well.  Individualism also states that your top priority should be to maximize your own profit and to make sure that you are put above all else.  So if you look at it in that sense Madoff was just trying to look after himself and provide himself with a better life which is technically right in the eyes of an individualist.  In the end, he did what he thought would benefit him the most and for that he is correct.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism basically states that by doing what is morally right will benefit the most amount of people and generate the greatest amount of happiness.  So in other words doing what is right should be placed above all else.  I think it is safe to say that Bernie Madoff stood for everything that utilitarianism is against.  For example, by running his massive Ponzi scheme he was not thinking about how the people he was taking money from were feeling he just wanted it all for himself no matter how many people he had to step on to get it.  As you can see Madoff was not interested in doing the right thing at all and because of this he let a lot of people down and caused a lot of unhappiness because of it.  If he were to do the right thing he would not be in jail right now and even if he couldn't make the amount he was making illegally he would still be making a good amount and it would all be clean instead of taken unwillingly from others. 

Kantianism

Kantianism says that all actions are performed with some type of overlying principle.  Going off of this Kant himself believed that everyone is a fundamentally rational being.  He went on to say that any action that is not rational cannot in any way be a good act no matter what that act may be.  The formula of humanity says that a rational person should never be treated as a means but as an end.  This principle can be applied to this particular case by simply asking the question of was what Madoff did rational?  This could easily be argued but personally I feel that it was not rational at all.  This is because even when he was running the Ponzi scheme and everything was going great he must have known eventually someone would catch on and find out everything he was doing.  He was not making rational decisions and because of it he paid price.  This case proves Kant's point because he stated that any act that is not rational cannot be a good act in any way.  This applies perfectly to this case because although Madoff might have thought that he could outsmart everyone it was only a matter of time before he was caught.

Virtue Theory

The four main virtue theories that are looked at heavily are courage, honesty, temperance and justice.  Looking at these in the perspective of Bernie Madoff I would say that he has some of these traits.  For instance, although what he did was very wrong he did have courage to actually go through with it and make it happen.  He also has temperance because he knew the whole time what could happen or what could go wrong so he was ready at all times for the worst.  He knew what as at stake and what he could lose but he still kept pursuing his business.  However, there are many things that he can improve on starting with honesty.  He lied to countless people’s faces and deliberately stole money right from underneath them.  This whole situation could have been avoided if he simply did this the right and honest way the first time around.  Another thing he can improve on is justice.  He did not do what was morally right once throughout this entire process and because of it, it all caught up to him which is why he is in jail for the rest of his life now. 

 

References:
http://www.biography.com/people/bernard-madoff-466366?page=1
http://www.forbes.com/2008/12/12/madoff-ponzi-hedge-pf-ii-in_rl_1212croesus_inl.html
http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/24/news/newsmakers/madoff.fortune/

John Perkins: Economic Hit Men (2004-Present)

Controversy

"Confessions of an Economic
Hit Man" by John Perkins

John Perkins defines economic hit men as "Highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars.” He claims they funnel money from the U.S. Agency for International Development, the World Bank, and other foreign 'aid' organizations. This just so happens to be the big hidden pockets of huge corporations/conglomerates, which in turn are just the pockets of a few wealthy families who control most of the planet's resources. These loaded families include "big wigs" within Chas. T. Main, Inc., Halliburton, and even the U.S. government's organizations. Their schemes include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs(bribes), extortion, sex, and murder. As John Perkins says "They play a game as old as empire, but one that has taken on new and terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization."

In John Perkins’ autobiography, he reveals his career as an economist for an international consulting firm. Perkins says he was actually an "Economic Hitman" and that his job was to convince countries to accept complex schemes that are strategically important to the United States. His work consisted of glorifying future economic growth projections to government officials around the world to accept enormous loans for infrastructure development, and to make sure that the lucrative projects were contracted by specific U.S. corporations. He explains how he created projections for countries to accept billions of dollars in loans they surely couldn't afford, forcing these victimized populations as stakeholders into a realm of slavery. He shares his battle with his conscience over the ethics of these actions and offers advice for how Americans can work to end these practices, which he feels have directly resulted in terrorist attacks and animosity towards United States government and it's people.

Karen Hudes of the World Bank is considered to be another highly credited whistle blower as John Perkins is. Hudes held the position of Senior Counsel within the World Bank, therefore giving her the chance to see exactly how the global elite rule the world, and the information that she is now revealing to the public is ever so connecting the growing pile of evidence against these criminal conglomerations. According to Hudes, the elite use a very tight core of financial institutions and mega-corporations to dominate the planet, claiming the main goal is control. “They want all of us enslaved to debt, they want all of our governments enslaved to debt, and they want all of our politicians addicted to the huge financial contributions that they funnel into their campaigns.” Since the elite also own all of the big media companies, the mainstream media never lets us in on the secret that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way that our system works.

Individualism

Individualist theory considers a business's primary goal to create maximum profit for its stockholders and/or employees. Yet this is only applicable as long as the company respects the laws of the land, and the rights of the people whom are affected by the overall business actions of the company. The “Economic Hit Men's” (EHM’s) job entail them to falsely justify huge loans for countries, typically poor, or simply just strategically useful for the U.S. government. The fraudulent financial reporting done by these EHM’s to convince countries to take out absurd loans that are considered highly unethical and sometimes illegal. Furthermore in response, the EHMs do not actually work directly for any U.S. government organizations in particular, i.e the NSA or even CIA.The risk with such a direct association is obvious, which is why the U.S. government outsourced their unethical acts to these interconnected conglomerates. These loans generally only benefited engineering and construction projects that were typically carried out by international consulting firm of Chas. T. Main, Inc. (MAIN), and other stakeholders and U.S. companies such as Bechtel, Stone & Webster, Brown & Root, and Halliburton. As a result, bankrupting these countries that received these loans after the U.S. companies involved had been paid. In return, this would put these countries in debt to their creditors for a very long time.

"World Bank Whistle blower" Karen Hudes

Kantianism

Kantianism states that businesses, or in this case corporations, should always work within the rules, and to never consider themselves exempt from said laws either. In addition the conglomerates are required to help consumers make well informed choices for the good of everyone. In this intrinsic value system it is instilled to allow the people to make rational, autonomous decisions which is the overall foundation for this theory. Yet these EHM's trick these countries into assuming it's their own choice, but this false autonomy is actually not nearly in their control at all. Both Hudes & Perkins would agree that these U.S. companies or even the U.S. government's organizations then target these countries into a form of extortion. Forcing these countries into doing “favors” such as, UN votes, setting up Military bases, and even access to their natural resources like oil.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism states that any action that tries to make everyone happy is ethical, therefore happiness is the most valuable ideal in regards to the theory of Utilitarianism. Countries like Indonesia and Panama, are being buried by these conglomerates with un-payable debt. The results of these transactions go against the overall theory of utilitarianism, depriving it’s citizens of health, education, and other social services. Services that we have taken for granted for several decades as these countries struggle economically to overcome their huge debts, resulting in unhappiness throughout the population for decades as well, therefore violating the ideals of Utilitarianism.

Virtue Theory

John Perkins, author of Confessions of an Economic Hit Man

The virtue theory emphasizes the role of one's character in addition to the virtues that one's character embodies for evaluating ethical behavior. When considering EHM's original intentions, their actions reflect an exemplary stand on virtue theory. As EHMs learned throughout their journeys, they realized that they were actually being highly un-honest to not only the exploited governing bodies of these countries, but to the entire population too. The EHM's lack of self-control resulted in unbalance of capital within these already struggling economies into economical prisoners to the criminal conglomerates. The EHM's who did eventually step up and became a whistle blower do show a form of courage, yet the level of glorified temperance they illegally instilled upon these countries into debt reinstates their absurd violation of the virtue theory.

ConclusionAlthough the entire debacle synthesized by these conglomerates formulates a sense of global capitalism, it is a more specific kind of capitalism that the U.S. has developed, which is a mutant, viral form of capitalism. This mutant form of capitalism is more like nature's model of predator and prey, that has created an extremely unstable, unsustainable, unjust and very dangerous world. John Perkins has interviewed many terrorists, whether it be for any of his books, or simply to reinstate his theory that no terrorist truly ever wanted to be a terrorist. He claims they are forced to be these desperate people who inevitably don’t have much of a choice not to be a terrorist due to all these countries and it's people being taken advantage off. If we want to get rid of terrorism we must get rid of the root cause of all of this. It’s this cancer of evil global capitalism that is destroying our whole system, whether it’s economics or simply ethics. It’s really important that we understand that in order to have homeland security, we need to understand that the entire planet is our home.





References
Coghlan, Andy, and Debora MacKanzie. "Revealed - The Capitalist Network That Runs The World." NewScientist. Reed Business Information Ltd., 4 July 2011. Web. 24 Oct. 2011.<http://www.newscientist.com/article mg21228354.500-revealed--the-capitalist-network-that-runs-the-world.html#.Ud5_NvmL3nj>.

Goodman, Alana. "IMF Whistleblower Banned from World Bank." The Washington Free Beacon [Washington] 7 Nov. 2013, Issues: n. pag. Print.

Highan, Scott. "SEC has opened investigation into KBR, whistleblower’s lawyer says." The Washington Post. The Washington Post, 10 Mar. 2014. Web. 1 Apr. 2014.<http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/
sec-has-opened-investigation-into-kbr-whistleblowers-lawyer-says/2014/03/10/d09ed14e-a883-11e3-8d62-419db477a0e6_story.html>.

Perkins, John. Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man. Vol. I. San Fransisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc, 2004. Print. New York Times Best Seller

Snyder, Micheal T. "World Bank Whistleblowers Karen Hudes Reveals How The Global Elite Rule The

World." The Economic Collapse Blog. Micheal T. Snyder, 30 Sept. 2013. Web. 30 Sept. 2013. <http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/world-bank-whistleblower-karen-hudes-reveals-how-the-global-elite-rule-the-world>.

Google: Selling Your Private Information (2012)

Controversy

Google Company logo

When you send an email, you expect this email to be read only by yourself and the person/people you directly send it to. You probably don't think that other people or bots will be reading your emails. And when you compose something using Google Docs you still don't suspect others to see what you wrote. Or how about when you watch a YouTube video, someone is keeping record of all the videos that you watch. Basically just know that if you use any type of Google product or service, Google has a way to be able to see what you typed or watched and then takes that information to sell to advertisement companies. In Google's Terms of Service Agreement it states, "When you upload or otherwise submit content to our Services, you give Google (and those we work with) a worldwide license to use, host, store, reproduce, modify, create derivative works (such as those resulting from translations, adaptations or other changes we make so that your content works better with our Services), communicate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute such content. The rights you grant in this license are for the limited purpose of operating, promoting, and improving our Services, and to develop new ones. This license continues even if you stop using our Services." Once you agree to the Terms of Services Agreement Google can do whatever they want with the data that they collect. A lot of people feel that this is infringing on their privacy rights even though it's legal because Google put it in their Terms of Services Agreement. But is this ethical? I will analyze this case using four different ethical theories.
Individualism

According to the theory of Individualism, one is deemed to be ethical as long as they don't break the law. Another key point of Individualism is to maximize profits. Therefore, if one maximizes profits within the constraint of the law, then they are ethical. In Google's case, they are not breaking the law by selling your data to advertisement companies because you agreed to their conditions. Google is also maximizing its profits. In 2012 and 2013 Google's advertisement revenue was $43,686,000,000 and $50,578,000,000 respectively. Since Google isn't breaking the law by selling your information and is definitely maximizing their profits, they are completely ethical according to theory of Individualism.

Utilitarianism

Larry Page, CEO of Google

The theory of Utilitarianism focuses on promoting the happiness of the maximum amount of people. Happiness is the only thing that has any real value according to this theory. People that own stock in Google are most likely happy because of the revenue that selling other's information creates. One thing to consider is if the happiness of those shareholders is greater than the other millions of people that feel their privacy is being violated. A survey done by Microsoft showed that 83% of people felt that Google was invading their privacy and 93% of people felt that there should be an opt out option when it comes to sharing their information. This shows that most people are not happy that Google is using their information which means that Google is not in accordance with Utilitarianism.

Kantianism
Kantian theory states that decisions should be made based on what's right, not on quantitative reasons such as maximization. There should be some type of good will behind every decision. People should be respected and informed so they can make rational decisions. Duty and respect of others comes before self interest. Businesses should especially be held to these standards. Google did perform it's duty to an extent by telling customers in the Terms of Service Agreement that their information can be used by Google for other reasons. However Google probably knows that no one actually reads the Terms of Service Agreement, and even if they did they would need a lawyer to understand it. So one may argue that Google in fact does not perform it's duty and should clearly state that consumer's information could be sold to advertising companies. Even with that argument, in the most basic sense, Google does perform it's duty and is ethical according to the Kantian theory.

Virtue Theory

Google Privacy propaganda image

Virtue Theory consists of four different elements. These elements are courage, honesty, temperance, and justice. Under the Virtue Theory, courage is to stand up for what is right. Honesty is to be truthful no matter what to all of the stakeholders. Temperance is to have realistic expectations. Justice is to be fair to all stakeholders. Google does not display courage because there is an overwhelming mass of people that believe Google is infringing on people's privacy rights, however Google still does it. Google was honest about it's actions and stated it's intentions in the Terms of Services Agreement. Google does not display temperance because they can't expect people to be okay with having their emails and documents looked at. Google was just to all if it's stakeholders because it is maximizing profits for shareholders and informed the other stakeholders that their information would be looked and Google could do what they want with that information. 

References

Williams, Amanda. "How Google Snoops on Your Email: Microsoft Accuses Rival Internet Giant of Using Private Details to Sell Adverts without Users' Knowledge." Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 06 Nov. 2013. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2487660/Google-snoops-email-uses-private-details-sell-adverts-Microsoft-claims.html>.

Arora, Nigam. "Be Prepared To Sell Your Soul If You Use Google." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 27 Jan. 2012. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2012/01/27/be-prepared-to-sell-your-soul-if-you-use-google/>. 

"2013 Financial Tables – Investor Relations – Google." 2013 Financial Tables – Investor Relations – Google. Google, n.d. Web. 30 Mar. 2014. <http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html>.

Kaiser, Tiffany. "Microsoft Attacks Gmail with "Scroogled" Campaign." DailyTech. N.p., 07 Feb. 2013. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://www.dailytech.com/Microsoft%2BAttacks%2BGmail%2Bwith%2BScroogled%2BCampaign/article29851.htm>.

Erickson, Christine. "Google Privacy: 5 Things the Tech Giant Does With Your Data."Mashable. N.p., 01 Mar. 2012. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. <http://mashable.com/2012/03/01/google-privacy-data-policy/>.