Case .

This scenario is an example of an intellectual property case in relation to research. Theos and Lanas actions relate to the use of copyrighted material in research. One of the legal implications, in this case, is whether Lana had valid obligations to assign rights of the copyrighted material to Theo. Secondly, the case generates concerns regarding the extent to which the sharing of data is legal. Theo and Lana acted in a legal and ethical manner as they did not violate copyright or academic honor code. While the school requires students to purchase the costly software application program, they were not necessarily required to purchase it from the school. Therefore, Theos action to purchase the software from an online vendor did not violate the academic honor code and was not tantamount to stealing as shown in Romans 13:9. Lana shared her copy of the program that she had purchased legally from the university bookstore. The institutions academic honor code does not prohibit students from sharing the software with their classmates. Based on existing copyright laws, anyone can use ideas presented or expressed in copyrighted material accessed electronically (Macrina, 2005).

Case 9.4

The use of copyrighted material in research can raise legal and ethical questions as evident in this scenario. Shamoo & Resnik (2014) contend that ethical conduct is essential to scientific research, which implies that researchers are required to act responsibly. In efforts to avoid copyright infringement, the postdoctoral fellow and mentor are modifying a computer-generated graph that they initially published in a preliminary report. Copyright laws basically safeguard the presentation or expression of an idea, but do not safeguard the idea itself (Macrina, 2005). Therefore, the actions of the two postdoctoral authors do not constitute copyright infringement. These authors have undertaken measures to prevent copyright infringement by modifying the initial graph and indicating its original publication. By planning to indicate its original authorship, these individuals do not present the graph as their own idea. Their actions reflected biblical teachings in Luke 6:31 and moral uprightness.

Case 9.5

This case is an example of a scenario involving potential scientific misconduct, which remains a major issue in the scientific community. From a legal perspective, Dr. Cook is right. Since Dr. Mondello signed a proper transfer agreement, she transferred the copyright for her work to the publishing company. Through this agreement, she assigned the entire copyright to the publishing company. The transfer is legally valid because it was done in writing (DeLoe, 2021). Therefore, I would advise Dr. Mondello not to proceed with the scientific misconduct charges because she assigned the entire copyright to the company. The publishing company did not act illegally or unethically since they own copyright to the manuscript. The publishing company did not steal copyright as stated in Romans 13:9, which warns against stealing. They followed the correct procedure and are not guilty of scientific misconduct.

Case 9.6

Fair use doctrine is a legal doctrine in the U.S. copyright laws that permits the use of parts of copyrighted work without authorization from the author/owner. Based on this legal doctrine, unauthorized use of copyrighted material is deemed justifiable if it meets the fair use principle. The determination of whether the use of copyrighted material is in line with this principle requires consideration of various factors including the nature and purpose of the use (Stim, 2012). Dr. Hefners policy is legal and ethical because it is in line with the principle of fair use. First, her research group...…proves that the death penalty should not be restored. By restoring the death penalty, many innocent people could end up being executed for crimes they never committed in the first place. Moreover, the death penalty contradicts biblical teachings about life and death. Exodus 20:13 explicitly prohibits murder. The death penalty would contradict this teaching as it promotes the murder of other people including innocent people. Capital punishment should be abolished as it contradicts biblical teachings and promotes the use of murder to punish murder. This punishment promotes a miscarriage of justice when innocent people are sometimes executed (Equal Justice Initiative, 2022).

Cryonics is a scientific experiment involving freezing people until cures for diseases are found in attempt to save lives. While this represents a scientific landmark, people should not be frozen until cures for diseases are found. First, there is no evidence to prove the veracity of this experiment as it is seemingly based on faith instead of science (Guizzetti, 2017). Secondly, the experiment does not guarantee normal functionality and would be tantamount to giving false hopes. There is no evidence that people who survive preservation would function normally, which implies they could end up burdening future generations. Finally this experiment contradicts biblical principles as it attempts to place life and death in the power of mankind. I believe that the power of life and death belongs to God as demonstrated in 1 Samuel 2:6.

Face transplantation is a high-risk procedure that can help improve ones life. I would consider getting a face transplant if my face is disfigured due to unexpected events like an accident. I would get a face transplant in such a situation in order to improve the quality of my life. I believe that a face…