PLATFORM BASED PEER PRODUCTION SYSTEMS ARE ETHICAL

Owing to the recent unethical issues associated with Uber, there has been unending discussion on whether these production systems are right or not. With every side of the discussion providing founded claims and logical propositions. But are these platforms really ethical? While the proponents of the platform-based peer production systems argument are elusive, the opponents of the platform-based peer production systems provide some more logical and rightful propositions on its unethical state based on either Utilitarianism or Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) theory. The legal position of business practice(s) is dependent on the effects it has on moral, social and cultural environment of the entire practice (Arridsson & Peitersen, 2013). In Utilitarianism perspective that all actions should aim at common good for all, in assessing whether online peer production platforms are right or wrong we must consider their effects on the entire business circle.

Failure to abide by the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) principles such as minimum wage, benefit to the shareholders and fair charges has led to its sanction not to operate in London. In 2016, the organisation is said to have incurred loses worth $3. 0 billion. With the assertion that Utilitarianism render a business action moral whenever it produces the greatest utility, the consistent biases and prejudices attributed to platform-based peer production systems render the platforms immoral. Besides the fact that these production systems are founded on the rising level of technology which has quite optimism to bend, they are fond of gender biases and generation prejudices. Too, the online service and production have little or no social responsibility to external business fraternity. Corporate social responsibility reinstates that there should be a balance in the prime reason for business to make profits.

In this case, while making profits the organisation works it out that the workers and consumers are satisfied. The peer production systems fail completely in executing the corporate social responsibility. By Utilitarianism approach platform-based peer production systems are unethical. However, the platform-based peer production are tools for liberation, they are termed as “hackers ethic of work” in which they have brought about uncopiable dynamic work ethics. these work ethics entail that work has to be fun and comfortable. Those in the old era/system feel uncomfortable with the new era which seem to be sweeping and making their effort in the economy obsolete. This is anti-Utilitarianism. Although the platform-based peer production systems are creating jobs (described as comfortable and civilized) they are rendering more individuals jobless.

The collaborative efforts to create other platforms from the existed although extractive is not regenerative. This has made many unable to value, monetarily, a probable road to making these platforms unethical. The monetization issue being a basic normative business principle, renders these recent innovations naïve antecedent business effort since it should be monetarily valuable by many (Bauwens, 2012). Despite the fact that the systems help to venture in broad and wider global markets with lower prices, the idea that peer-to-peer structuralising and ownership of these production bar the public interest to invest in it unethical by Utilitarianism principles (Kleiner, 2013). Therefore, there is no layout in which conventional antitrust regulation framework can control information economy platforms. s WORKS CITED Miles, Jason G.