Question

Was it ethical for the search engines to comply fully with the DOJ subpoena discussed in the case?

"The Wall Street Journal article was referring to January 19, 2006, when the Department of Justice subpoenaed Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and AOL for data on user queries submitted to their online search engines and a random sample of one million indexed web addresses (Mohammed, 2006). The Department of Justice sought to use this data to combat child pornography. "

Answer 1

The question whether it is ethical or not in the above case, could be solved through one of the various ethical theories that one appreciates. Going with the Kantian theory of ethics, the philosophy of ‘Categorical Imperative Dignity Principle’, could be put into practice. It is a normative philosophy that states the ‘Greatest good for the greatest number’ and ensures us to act only in ways that one would wish all others to act, provided faced with the same set of circumstances and that to always treat other people with dignity and respect.

In this regard, combating of child photography was necessary by the Department of Justice since the dignity and respect of children were put into danger. Besides, child pornography would have adverse and long-lasting impacts on both, the mental and physical health of the children. Therefore, had the children of the key Management of Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL were victimized and these Search Engine entities were been put in the same condition as that of DOJ, then they would have probably taken the same step of resorting to a random sample of one million indexed web addresses, to crack down the child pornography sites and report it to the necessary authorities for actions, as what DOJ undertook.

This act of DOJ thus suffices Kantian principles and therefore, the act was ethical for it was undertaken with the greater good of the society; the children of our Nation; the future of tomorrow.