It will be interesting to see what evidence surfaces here. But I generally think you have to decide early on to either be a morality (or faith-based) company or a profit-driven company.
The US tracks, listens to and monitors and does some distasteful things to -- and on behalf of -- its citizens, too. Should Cisco also refuse to sell to the US government?
I will back out and let Craig be your debating partner as I believe like you do. In fact, I would be okay designing weapons and have no qualms about it. I am just saying that Communications and Control of it is a highly important thing - like you said we spy on us and them through it.
We shouldn't just overstate what's the deal here. Cisco is a box manufacturer. Those boxes can be used for the good or the bad, and it's absolutely not up to cisco to decide. The system says companies follow profits. CISCO as a company has only one duty : follow money legally. And in the case it is legal, I assume (have no direct knowledge of facts). If that is not ok than challenge the system, not it's elements which, basically, just play according to the system's rules. To make it extreme: was the manufacturer of the thermometer used by hitler during a flu morally questionable b/c it saved a man guility of genocide? In the end, we should see the big picture instead of focusing on details. The big picture says CISCO (or anybody else, again) has really no choice in those cases...
I understand your point about Cisco being a box manufacturer, and I think I even conceded that earlier. But what we're talking about goes beyond that.
Cisco in this case knew exactly what the boxes were going to be used for. To me, that clouds up the usual morality of technology being neutral.
And the lawsuit claims Cisco went one step further, taking an active hand in making sure its equipment could be used to locate dissidents. Totally different from selling boxes.
In most router sales, you wouldn't think about the implications of the network being built. That, I don't have a problem with. But I think there are times when you do have to think about those consequences. Not always, but sometimes. This would be one of those times.
You don't have to agree. But if the accusations in the lawsuit hold up, then Cisco is going to need a better argument than, "We just sell boxes."
It will be interesting to see what evidence surfaces here. But I generally think you have to decide early on to either be a morality (or faith-based) company or a profit-driven company.
The US tracks, listens to and monitors and does some distasteful things to -- and on behalf of -- its citizens, too. Should Cisco also refuse to sell to the US government?