Decentralising the Self - Ethical Considerations in Utilizing Decentralised Web Technology for Direct Brain Interfaces.

The rapidly advancing field of brain-computer (BCI) and brain-to-brain interfaces (BBI) is stimulating interest across various sectors including medicine, entertainment, research, and military. The developers of large-scale brain-computer networks, sometimes dubbed 'Mindplexes' or 'Cloudminds', aim to enhance cognitive functions by distributing them across expansive networks. A key technical challenge is the efficient transmission and storage of information. One proposed solution is employing blockchain technology over Web 3.0 to create decentralised cognitive entities. This paper explores the potential of a decentralised web for coordinating large brain-computer constellations, and its associated benefits, focusing in particular on the conceptual and ethical challenges this innovation may pose pertaining to (1) Identity, (2) Sovereignty (encompassing Autonomy, Authenticity, and Ownership), (3) Responsibility and Accountability, and (4) Privacy, Safety, and Security. We suggest that while a decentralised web can address some concerns and mitigate certain risks, underlying ethical issues persist. Fundamental questions about entity definition within these networks, the distinctions between individuals and collectives, and responsibility distribution within and between networks, demand further exploration.

How the minimalist model of ownership psychology can aid in explaining moral behaviors under resource constraints.

The model of ownership psychology as a cognitive adaptation proposes that people flexibly navigate cognitive systems of cooperation and competition, thus enabling them to justify unethical behavior. We discuss how this model captures previous accounts of unethical behavior and propose that a disengagement heuristic can help us understand recent findings in the interconnection between scarcity psychology and unethical behavior.

Autonomy, the moral circle, and the limits of ownership.

Why can't we own people? Boyer proposes that the key consideration concerns inclusion in the moral circle. I propose an alternative, which is that specific mental capacities, especially the capacity for autonomy, play a key role in determining judgments about human and animal ownership. Autonomous beings are viewed as owning themselves, which precludes them from being owned by others.

Ownership and willingness to compete for resources.

Boyer proposes that ownership intuitions depend on tracking cues predictive of agents' motivations to compete for resources. However, the account may mis-predict people's intuitions about ownership, and it may also be too cognitively costly to be feasible. Even so, alternative accounts could benefit by taking inspiration from how the account handles thorny issues in the psychology of ownership.

Leadership, religiousness, state ownership of an enterprise and unethical pro-organizational behavior: The mediating role of organizational identification.

This study proposes a model in which organizational identification mediates the correlations among state-owned enterprises (SOEs), authentic leadership, Christian religiousness, and unethical pro-organizational behavior (UPB). The proposed theoretical framework is based on moral identity theory, social identity theory, and social exchange theory. We tested the hypothesized model using data (N = 389) from employees of various companies and industries in Poland. Of the respondents, 49.1% worked in SOEs. The reliability and validity of the measures were established. The correlation coefficients among the analyzed variables were obtained using the bootstrap confidence interval method. To thoroughly examine the causal relationships among the variables, covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) was adopted. Path analysis was conducted and used to verify a model in which organizational identification mediated the correlations among state involvement in the ownership of an enterprise, authentic leadership, Christian religiousness, and UPB. State involvement in the ownership of an enterprise, authentic leadership, and Christian religiousness were linked to increased organizational identification, which in turn was linked to the intensification of UPB. With the level of organizational identification controlled, state ownership of an enterprise was linked to lower UPB intensity. Limitations, implications and future research directions are discussed.

The Corporate Practice of Medicine: Ethical Implications of Orthopaedic Surgery Practice Ownership by Non-Physicians.

There has been an upsurge in the number of practices owned by non-physicians. With orthopaedic surgery as the next frontier in this market, orthopaedists need to consider the ethical consequences of such acquisitions. The history and trends of practice ownership are reviewed alongside how laws shifted to reflect a changing health-care climate. The 4 tenets of bioethics (beneficence, nonmaleficence, autonomy, and justice) are explored with regard to practice acquisition by non-physician entities. Although non-physician-owned corporations and private equity firms provide liquidity to the health-care sector, there are ethical concerns that may ultimately impact patient care. Orthopaedic surgeons must be cautious when engaging in acquisitions with non-physician-owned entities, as the goals of each party may not align. This may yield situations that infringe on the basic principles of bioethics for both physician and patient.

Legal and ethical framework for global health information and biospecimen exchange - an international perspective.

BACKGROUND: The progress of electronic health technologies and biobanks holds enormous promise for efficient research. Evidence shows that studies based on sharing and secondary use of data/samples have the potential to significantly advance medical knowledge. However, sharing of such resources for international collaboration is hampered by the lack of clarity about ethical and legal requirements for transfer of data and samples across international borders. MAIN TEXT: Here, the International Clinical Trial Center Network (ICN) reports the legal and ethical requirements governing data and sample exchange (DSE) across four continents. The most recurring requirement is ethical approval, whereas only in specific conditions approval of national health authorities is required. Informed consent is not required in all sharing situations. However, waiver of informed consent is only allowed in certain countries/regions and under certain circumstances. The current legal and ethical landscape appears to be very complex and under constant evolution. Regulations differ between countries/regions and are often incomplete, leading to uncertainty. CONCLUSION: With this work, ICN illuminates the unmet need for a single international collaborative framework to facilitate DSE. Harmonising requirements for global DSE will reduce inefficiency and waste in research. There are many challenges to realising this ambitious vision, including inconsistent terminology and definitions, and heterogeneous and dynamic legal constraints. Here, we identify areas of agreement and significant difference as a necessary first step towards facilitating international collaboration. We propose the establishment of a working group to continue the comparison across jurisdictions, create a standardised glossary and define a set of basic principles and fundamental requirements for DSE.

Use of in vitro fertilization-ethical issues.

This report is an ethical analysis based on both facts and values. In in vitro fertilization (IVF), there is an intricate interaction between rapid scientific development and changing societal values. In most countries, the ethical discussion is no longer on whether or not IVF in itself is ethically justifiable. Therefore, in this review, I discuss other ethical aspects that have emerged since IVF was first introduced, such as upper age limits, 'ownership' of gametes and embryos, IVF in single women and same-sex couples, preimplantatory genetic testing, social egg freezing, commercialization, public funding, and prioritization of IVF. Despite secularization, since religion still plays an important role in regulation and practices of IVF in many countries, positions on IVF among the world religions are summarized. Decision-making concerning IVF cannot be based only on clinical and economic considerations; these cannot be disentangled from ethical principles. Many concerns regarding the costs, effects, and safety of IVF subtly transcend into more complex questions about what it means to society to bear and give birth to children.

Donors, authors, and owners: how is genomic citizen science addressing interests in research outputs?

BACKGROUND: Citizen science is increasingly prevalent in the biomedical sciences, including the field of human genomics. Genomic citizen science initiatives present new opportunities to engage individuals in scientific discovery, but they also are provoking new questions regarding who owns the outputs of the research, including intangible ideas and discoveries and tangible writings, tools, technologies, and products. The legal and ethical claims of participants to research outputs become stronger-and also more likely to conflict with those of institution-based researchers and other stakeholders-as participants become more involved, quantitatively and qualitatively, in the research process. It is not yet known, however, how genomic citizen science initiatives are managing the interests of their participants in accessing and controlling research outputs in practice. To help fill this gap, we conducted an in-depth review of relevant policies and practices of U.S.-based genomic citizen science initiatives. METHODS: We queried the peer-reviewed literature and grey literature to identify 22 genomic citizen science initiatives that satisfied six inclusion criteria. A data collection form was used to capture initiative features, policies, and practices relevant to participants' access to and control over research outputs. RESULTS: This analysis revealed that the genomic citizen science landscape is diverse and includes many initiatives that do not have institutional affiliations. Two trends that are in apparent tension were identified: commercialization and operationalization of a philosophy of openness. While most initiatives supported participants' access to research outputs, including datasets and published findings, none supported participants' control over results via intellectual property, licensing, or commercialization rights. However, several initiatives disclaimed their own rights to profit from outputs. CONCLUSIONS: There are opportunities for citizen science initiatives to incorporate more features that support participants' access to and control over research outputs, consistent with their specific objectives, operations, and technical capabilities.

Predictive analytics in health care: how can we know it works?

There is increasing awareness that the methodology and findings of research should be transparent. This includes studies using artificial intelligence to develop predictive algorithms that make individualized diagnostic or prognostic risk predictions. We argue that it is paramount to make the algorithm behind any prediction publicly available. This allows independent external validation, assessment of performance heterogeneity across settings and over time, and algorithm refinement or updating. Online calculators and apps may aid uptake if accompanied with sufficient information. For algorithms based on "black box" machine learning methods, software for algorithm implementation is a must. Hiding algorithms for commercial exploitation is unethical, because there is no possibility to assess whether algorithms work as advertised or to monitor when and how algorithms are updated. Journals and funders should demand maximal transparency for publications on predictive algorithms, and clinical guidelines should only recommend publicly available algorithms.

Sharing with Strangers: Governance Models for Borderless Genomic Research in a Territorial World.

One of the practices that has defined the ethos of genomic research to date is a commitment to open and rapid sharing of genomic data and resources. As genomic research evolves into an international enterprise, this commitment is being challenged by the need to respect the interests of those it involves and implicates, from individual scientists and subjects to institutions and nations. In this essay, we first describe the types of claims that different stakeholders are making about the disposition of genomic data and samples. Next, we illustrate the complexities of these multiple claims by applying them to the case of one ongoing international genomics initiative, the H3Africa Consortium. Finally, in the light of these complexities, we conclude by comparing and contrasting four governance models for future international data-sharing policy and practices in genomics.

Mind the Gap! How the Digital Turn Upsets Intellectual Property.

Intellectual property is one of the highly divisive issues in contemporary philosophical and political debates. The main objective of this paper is to explore some sources of tension between the formal rules of intellectual property (particularly copyright and patents) and the emerging informal norms of file sharing and open access in online environments. We look into the file sharing phenomena not only to illustrate the deepening gap between the two sets of norms, but to cast some doubt on the current regime of intellectual property as an adequate frame for the new type of interactions in online environments. Revisiting the classic Arrow-Demsetz debate about intellectual property and the epistemological issues involved in assessing institutions, we suggest that seeking out new institutional arrangements aligned with the norms-in-use seems to be a more promising strategy in the new technological setting than attempting to reinforce the current legal framework. Moreover, such a strategy is less prone to committing the so-called 'Nirvana fallacies'. As a secondary task, we try to cast some doubt on the two most common moral justifications of intellectual property as being able to ground the full extent of the current intellectual property regime.

Alienation from the Objectives of the Patent System: How to Remedy the Situation of Biotechnology Patent.

Some fundamental biotechnologies hold unprecedented potential to eradicate many incurable diseases. However, in absence of regulations, the power of patent makes the future use of some important biotechnology in few institution's hands. The excessive patents restrict researcher access to the fundamental technologies. It generates concerns and complaints of deteriorating the public health and social welfare. Furthermore, intellectual curiosities, funding, respect among colleagues etc., rather than patents, are the real motivations driving a major ground-breaking discoveries in biotechnology. These phenomena reveal that some biotechnology patents are alienated from the purpose of patent system. Therefore, it is necessary to take some approaches to stop over-patenting these fundamental biotechnology inventions. This article proposes a model regulatory framework for controlling biotechnology patent alienating from the purpose of patent system.

Chapitre 7. Colonies humaines et cosmos.

We have come far from the days when space activities were the monopoly of States. Henceforth, private actors, from the tech world, possess significant financial means which they intend to mobilise in order to exploit the resources of outer space commercially and, eventually, to inhabit outer space. As a result, the principle of non-appropriation of celestial bodies is seen by some as an impediment to the development of the exploitation of space.Is it really possible to envisage a human community inhabiting outer space without claiming exclusive rights on the surface of celestial bodies? Can the resources extracted from celestial bodies be appropriated and if so what legal regime could manage the said resources?This article attempts to answer these questions with a double approach focussing on the ownership of celestial resources and the ownership of celestial bodies.The recognition since the Obama Act that celestial resources can be appropriated imposes a model of management of the said resources in the interests of the whole of mankind.Likewise, without undermining the fundamental principle of non-appropriation, States should establish themselves as the managers and guarantors of the use of celestial bodies in that they constitute the common heritage of Earth's community.

Time to pull the trigger? Examining the ethical permissibility of minimum age restrictions for gun ownership and use.

A series of prominent mass shootings in the United States (US) has prompted renewed interest in revising gun policy. One proposal that has gained political traction is raising the minimum age for purchase and possession of guns to 21. While some commentators have suggested that the public mood may be shifting on gun policy, proposals to raise the minimum age have nevertheless provoked controversy. In this manuscript, we examine the ethical acceptability of raising the minimum age of purchase and possession of guns to 21. First, we examine the nature of the rights claim at issue. Second, we examine liberty-based objections to minimum age laws, and offer counter-arguments to these claims. Then, we examine the nature of the harm to be prevented via minimum age laws. We conclude that gun ownership is an important right, but one that nevertheless is ethical to regulate. We argue that liberty-based objections to minimum age laws are not as strong as critics of these laws claim. While we acknowledge the data limitations on assessing their likely success in reducing gun-related harms, we argue that minimum age laws are an ethically permissible policy strategy. We conclude with several recommendations for further research and policy responses to addressing the toll of gun-related morbidity and mortality.

Reuse of cardiac organs in transplantation: an ethical analysis.

BACKGROUND: This paper examines the ethical aspects of organ transplant surgery in which a donor heart is transplanted from a first recipient, following determination of death by neurologic criteria, to a second recipient. Retransplantation in this sense differs from that in which one recipient undergoes repeat heart transplantation of a newly donated organ, and is thus referred to here as "reuse cardiac organ transplantation." METHODS: Medical, legal, and ethical analysis, with a main focus on ethical analysis. RESULTS: From the medical perspective, it is critical to ensure the quality and safety of reused organs, but we lack sufficient empirical data pertaining to medical risk. From the legal perspective, a comparative examination of laws in the United States and Japan affirms no illegality, but legal scholars disagree on the appropriate analysis of the issues, including whether or not property rights apply to transplanted organs. Ethical arguments supporting the reuse of organs include the analogous nature of donation to gifts, the value of donations as inheritance property, and the public property theory as it pertains to organs. Meanwhile, ethical arguments such as those that address organ recycling and identity issues challenge organ reuse. CONCLUSION: We conclude that organ reuse is not only ethically permissible, but even ethically desirable. Furthermore, we suggest changes to be implemented in the informed consent process prior to organ transplantation. The organ transplant community worldwide should engage in wider and deeper discussions, in hopes that such efforts will lead to the timely preparation of guidelines to implement reuse cardiac organ transplantation as well as reuse transplantation of other organs such as kidney and liver.

Provenance and risk in transfer of biological materials.

Whereas biological materials were once transferred freely, there has been a marked shift in the formalisation of exchanges involving these materials, primarily through the use of Material Transfer Agreements (MTAs). This paper considers how risk aversion dominates MTA negotiations and the impact it may have on scientific progress. Risk aversion is often based on unwarranted fears of incurring liability through the use of a material or loss of control or missing out on commercialisation opportunities. Evidence to date has suggested that complexity tends to permeate even straightforward transactions despite extensive efforts to implement simple, standard MTAs. We argue that in most cases, MTAs need do little more than establish provenance, and any attempt to extend MTAs beyond this simple function constitutes stifling behaviour. Drawing on available examples of favourable practice, we point to a number of strategies that may usefully be employed to reduce risk-averse tendencies, including the promotion of simplicity, education of those engaged in the MTA process, and achieving a cultural shift in the way in which technology transfer office (TTO) success is measured in institutions employing MTAs.

The ethics of mHealth: Moving forward.

There is great power and promise for mobile health (mHealth) technology in the realms of clinical practice and research. By offering the opportunity to reshape the interaction between clinician and patient or researcher and subject, the introduction of this technology allows clinicians and researchers access to larger quantities of more timely and reliable data. The potential developments are significant, and they are ethically relevant. With all technological developments, however, come new sets of ethical risks. In this paper, I assess the ethics of mHealth. I argue that while we have an ethical obligation to advance this work in order to further the quality and scope of care, the use of mHealth technology also presents challenges that must be addressed before and during the use of this technology. After describing the ethical landscape, I offer a pragmatic approach to meeting some of these challenges and minimizing ethical risk by switching from a privacy-centered frame to a consent-centered frame.

Corpo e property rights: limiti e criticità nel bilanciamento tra interessi individuali e collettivi / Cuerpo y derecho de propiedad: problemas y límites en el balance entre intereses individuales y colectivos / Cos i drets de propietat: límits i assumptes crítics en el balanç entre interessos individuals i col·lectius / Body and property rights: critical issues and limits in the balance between individual and collective interests

Questa analisi prende in esame le principali criticità che nell'attuale dibattito etico e giusfilosofico sono connesse al processo di giustificazione e qualificazione del diritto di proprietà del corpo e delle sue parti, nella tensione tra interessi individuali e interessi collettivi. Le difficoltà risiedono nel considerare proprietà del soggetto quelle parti del corpo, come i campioni biologici, che possono essere ritenute espressione dell'identità biologica del soggetto dal quale provengono, in quanto parti non «autonome o riproducibili», e adottando il modello proprietario, per cui il campione biologico una volta separato dal corpo viene visto come un bene mobile e quindi oggetto di proprietà alla stregua di qualsiasi altro bene, diventa ancor più problematico qualificare la relazione tra corpo, diritto e proprietà dal punto di vista ontologico e normativo. Ciò ha determinato l'esigenza di ripensare concettualmente la definizione dello statuto etico-giuridico del corpo umano e della proprietà delle sue parti, la cui discussione è divenuta imprescindibile nel dibattito contemporaneo

Este análisis reflexiona sobre cómo el debate contemporáneo vinculado a los campos de la ética y de la filosofía del derecho ha abordado la problemática de justificar y calificar el derecho a reclamar un interés de propiedad del propio cuerpo y de sus partes. Al abordar este problema, pretendo destacar la tensión que existe entre los derechos individuales y colectivos y el desafío que supone tratar muestras biológicas como propiedad: puesto que dichos tejidos no pueden reproducirse independientemente del individuo del que provienen, y por lo tanto están estrechamente relacionados con la identidad biológica del individuo, así que resulta complejo usarlos como cualquier otra propiedad personal, o «movible». Esto hace necesario elaborar una ontología de la relación entre el cuerpo y la propiedad, a fin de comprender si esta relación apoya normativamente la noción de un derecho de propiedad del cuerpo, repensando así el marco legal y ético del cuerpo humano y sus partes como sujeto de propiedad

Aquest anàlisi reflexiona sobre com el debat contemporani vinculat als camps de l'ètica i de la filosofia del dret ha abordat la problemàtica de com justificar i qualificar el dret a reclamar un interès de propietat del propi cos i de les seves parts. Al tractar aquest problema, pretenc destacar la tensió existent entre els drets individuals i col·lectius i el desafiament que suposa tractar mostres biològiques com a propietat: ja que aquests teixits no poden reproduir-se independentment de l'individu del que provenen, i per tant estan estretament relacionats amb la identitat biològica de l'individu, així que resulta complex fer-los servir com a qualsevol altra propietat personal, o «movible». Aquest fet fa necessari elaborar una ontologia de la relació entre el cos i la propietat, amb la finalitat de comprendre si aquesta relació dóna suport normativament a la noció d'un dret de propietat del cos, repensant així el marc legal i ètic del cos humà i de les seves parts com a subjectes de propietat

This analysis looks at the way the contemporary debate in ethics and legal philosophy has addressed the problem of justifying and qualifying the right to claim a property interest in the body and its parts. In treating this problem I highlight the tension between individual and collective rights and the challenge of treating something like biological samples as property: since such tissue cannot be reproduced independently of the individual from which it comes, and so is closely bound up with the individual's biological identity, there seems to be something amiss in the idea of using it like any other piece of personal property, or «movable». This makes it necessary to work out the ontology of the relation between the body and property, so as to understand whether this relation normatively supports the notion of a property right in the body, thus rethinking the legal and ethical status of the human body and its parts as subject to ownership