Case Number: Case 00-1 Year: 2000 Facts: Engineer A a CEO of a small engineering corporation, teams up with another small firm in the development and delivery of highway/rail intersection database management systems for various public and private enterprises. Engineer A is the co-author and the program patented/copyrighted Engineer B in a private firm from State X calls Engineer A and informs Engineer that State X's Department of Transportation (XDOT) is interested in the highway/rail system and has asked Engineer B to evaluate the system. Engineer B requests and Engineer A agrees to visit with Engineer Bin State X. Prior to the visit, Engineer B requests that Engineer A prepare a project proposal which Engineer A submits. Later, at Engineer B's request Engineer A visits Engineer B's offices and demonstrates the systems. Project managers, as well as programmers, from Engineer B's firm are present at the meeting Engineer A describes in great detail the technical aspects of the system. Following the meeting Engineer B requests that Engineer A prepare a new proposal with a detailed breakdown of all costs. Following the passage of time, Engineer A receives a phone call from a subordinate of Engineer B advising that Engineer B will not need Engineer A's firm's services because Engineer B's firm now has the capability to design their own system Question(s): Was it ethical for Engineer B to obtain Engineer A's technology in the manner herein described? Discussion: The NSPE Board of Ethical Review (BER) has had occasion to consider issues involving engineers apparently misappropriating ideas and designs from other engineers. One example is BER Case No. 96-7, where Engineer C was employed by UVW Consultants, a major structural engineering firm, and is a project manager for a bridge. After completing his work on the bridge, Engineer Cleft the firm and associates with another structural engineering firm that had no relationship to the bridge project. As an employee of the new firm, Engineer Cauthored an article for an international structural engineering journal on the bridge project. Under the title of the article, Engineer Clisted his name and identified his affiliation with his current firm. The only credit given to UVW Consultants is listed at the end of the article under Engineer of Record." In reviewing the facts and circumstances Involved, the Board noted that this case differed from these earlier cases in that, while giving prominence to his new firm by its identification at the title Engineer did list UVW Consultants as "Engineer of Record at the end of the article While it may be argued that the stated listings were not dishonest, the Board cannot accept that defense for something so potentially misleading and unfair. Consider had the author been a journalist or free- Lance technical writer, surely UVW Consultants, the design firm, would have been recognized as material to the artide and would have been dearly identified within the body of the artide. Engineer C's failure to include that relevant and material information is believed deliberate and less than forthright