Please complete the case study using the following format:

1. Determine the facts. (the ones relevant to the ethical issue)
2. Identify the ethical issues involved.
3. Identify stakeholders and consider the situation from their point of view.
4. Identify available alternatives.
5. Compare the alternatives based on:

a. Consequences for each stakeholder

b. Duties, Rights, and Principles

c. Implications for personal integrity and character

6. Make a decision. (what should happen?)

Hogan owns a midsized company called Sanctimonious Inc. One of the ventures of this company is direct mail marketing. To increase the companys footprint, Hogan licensed with Dossier Inc., a company that deals in customer databases. Dossier Inc. is run by Chad and is a small business with two employees. As part of the license agreement, Chad is responsible for the safety and encryption of the databases, its maintenance and upkeep, and is responsible for any breaches that might occur. Hogans company uses the information on the databases to target customers for its services. Earlier in the year, but after the Agreement was signed, a far western state where the two companies are located and incorporated passed a law on privacy. Europe had been passing laws on this very topic and the far western states legislators generally viewed European trends to be the way to go. The law states that upon request, any person residing in the state could have their information removed from any list. This included any results from search engines. This would mean that if a person had requested to be removed, any search for their name and likeness would turn up empty. Understandably, this created much stress for Chad. How could he license his databases if every name on them had to be lawfully removed? The far western state called this law, the right to privacy. Luckily for Chad, a movie producer had been sued by an actress and won. It might seem that this had little to do with Chads future, but that would be wrong. The actress, seeing that the privacy law had been passed, saw her chance to be removed from a movie that had put her in a compromising role in her youth. When the producer refused to remove her scene from the movie and name from the credits, she sued under the law. At the district level she won her suit, but upon appeal, the U.S. Supreme Court had immediately taken up the case and clarified the law on the issue. While privacy rights were important, they were not as important as the Constitution. In the Constitution there is a section about intellectual property rights. Because of this, the producer owned the intellectual property of the movie, and could not be forced to alter it or change it because of some inferior right such as privacy. This effectively obliterated the far western states law on the right to privacy. Hogan, however, has always loved things from Europe and was a fan of the law from the start. Upon hearing the resolution of the case, he stated, Law or no law, our company is going to adhere to the right to privacy effective immediately. The founders should have thought to include privacy rights in the Constitution. This puts Chad in a bind. His license agreement says nothing about an event like this happening. In fact, it clearly states that he is responsible for the safety and encryption of the database, its maintenance and upkeep, and any breaches. He does not believe that privacy rights trump intellectual property rights. If the policy of the company he is licensed to is to remove names of those that request it, Chad would have to create a whole new set of databases to keep for Sanctimonious, while trying to preserve his current gen. His license agreement is for 3 more years. If Chad is forced to inform all the customers on his database and field replies and removal, he will have to hire many more employees and an attorney to consult. Add to that that each person in the database would have to consent to this new arrangement and Chad was looking at thousands of man hours. This would mean that he would be losing money on the license. If he refuses to do so, he is in breach and will be sued by Hogan. What is Chad supposed to do?