Heading



Title: Ethics of Information Technology Module

Title: Cyber ethics: The Ethics Of Information Technology

Author: Frances S Grodzinsky Professor of Computer Science and Information

Technology Sacred Heart University

Grodzinskyf@sacredheart.edu

Description: This module encompasses topics that are related to computing and society. They all deal with what happens at the intersection of society and technology. We are all users of technology and as such should recognize that not only does technology impact society, but also society impacts technology. To that end, there must be an ethical dimension in both the development and implementation of technological solutions to problems, and in the use of technology in everyday life. This two dimensional focus broadens the discussion of computer ethics to that of cyber ethics, Internet ethics or information ethics. Cyber ethics as a designation is broader as it encompasses computer technology that exists and yet might not be related to the Internet. Discussions and dialogues about cyber ethics are important not only for computer science and information technology majors, but also for the wide spectrum of students and faculty at the university who are all computer users.

This module will help you to investigate the questions at the intersection of computing technology and society from an ethical perspective. To be an ethical computer professional or computer user, one has to know the values that underlie one’s decision-making process. While this is largely and ultimately an individual process and choice, the values one espouses become the foundation for the individual’s interaction with society and technology. Aristotle believed that becoming an ethical person is akin to an apprenticeship under the tutelage of moral mentors. The role of the teacher/scholar in cyber ethics is to guide her students towards this goal within the safe boundaries of the classroom, to develop undergraduate curricula around ethical issues that impact on computer users and to disseminate these ideas through the incorporation of one or more modules within the classroom. It is through this incorporation that we can evaluate the ethical values that should be espoused in the use of computer technologies, and the policies that should be developed along with these technologies that will ensure their ethical implementation.

Module:

Relevant Topics for Discussion :

Justice, Autonomy, Freedom, Democracy and Privacy are all values that can be supported or threatened by computer technology. Considering that computer technologies are the fundamental infrastructure of the Information Age, ethical questions arise regarding access and control, privacy, property, identity and professional responsibility. We can break down these issues into three broad sections:

1. Ethical Process and Conceptual Frameworks

a. Here is a framework for ethical analysis, which can be used in oral and written work for your course. See The Ethical Process by Marvin Brown published by Prentice Hall. This little workbook details how one presents ethical arguments. It goes over the proposal, observations, assumptions and value judgments. It teaches, using worksheets, how to develop counterarguments and how to support your position using ethical theories. There is also a good chapter on philosophical ethics (Chapter 2) in Ethics and Technology by Herman Tavani published by Wiley. Tavani also has a good treatment on logical argument and critical thinking skills. He gives a detailed analysis and tools for evaluating cyber ethical issues.

i. Both of these books evaluate Utilitarianism, Deontology, Virtue Ethics and Rights theories. Discussions of these theories can be found in the Philosophical Ethics Module in this grouping.

ii. James Moor has developed an interesting theoretical approach called Just Consequentialism that marries a consequentialist analysis with theories of justice (see Moor, “Just Consequentialism and Computing”).

iii. This ethical analysis can be used in your course with any given question that requires a position. Using the worksheets in groups or in the class as a whole, gives students a handle on ethical analysis skills.

b. An issue of importance that could be discussed in this section is whether Cybertechnology, or any technology, is value laden or value neutral.

i. Questions to ask:

1. Are values embedded in technological artifacts?

2. Are biases evident in the design of technology? Where?

a. Example 1: one could look at the user interfaces to determine if there is gender bias, or insensitivity to users with color blindness.

b. Example 2: one could study computer game interfaces and content for gender bias.

c. Example 3: can be chosen from any technological artifact such as the ipod, cell phone, etc.

2. Issues of Access and Control

In this section, relevant topics include: equity of access, computer crime, democracy, content control and free speech, the Digital Divide, privacy, and property. Issues around these topics could be raised in sociology, criminal justice, political science and history classes. In the sciences, issues of data protection especially within the medical community, and biometric indicators would provide the class with a perspective on some cutting edge ethical issues. Philosophy classes could tackle the problem of privacy as a social and/or individual good. Here are some subtopics that could be used under the more general ones and associated questions to investigate. The bibliography provides sources for all these topics:

a. Computer Crime

i. Hackers and Crackers

1. Hacker code of ethics

2. Peer group pressures / reputation

3. Internet crime rings

ii. Cyber crime

1. Trespass

a. Viruses

b. Theft of data and information

2. Piracy

a. Software copying

i. Proprietary software v. Open source

ii. This can also be discussed under Intellectual Property

b. Movies / cd’s / dvd’s

c. Identity Theft

3. Predatory crimes

a. Stalking

b. Child pornography

c. Chat Room predators

iii. Security in cyberspace: The Internet and ethical values

1. Protecting computer systems from unauthorized access, viruses, worms, bots

2. Protecting data that is stored in computer systems.

3. Counter measures: Do they work? What are we giving up?

a. Firewalls

b. Virus protection software

c. Encryption tools

b. Cybertechnology & Democracy:

i. Is the Internet a democratic medium?

a. What is democracy?

b. Can we find the characteristics of a democracy on line?

c. Is privacy necessary for democracy?

ii. Does the Internet facilitate democracy and democratic ideals?

a. If so how?

b. Look at the use of the Internet in democratic vs. non-democratic countries like China or North Korea.

iii. Surveillance: Security using computer technology

a. Biometric markers

b. Cookies: How much do we know about the cookies stored on our systems?

i. Marketing strategies using cookies: Look at sites like Amazon.

ii. Tracing our web usage through cookies.

c. RFID tags in clothing

d. CCTV - cameras used in the UK to monitor street activity

e. Chips implanted in pets.

i. Should we put chips in our children, in case of kidnapping? This is a provocative question that causes a lot of discussion.

iv. An important question is, What are we giving up in the name of security? Privacy.

a. A study of the 4th Amendment and the Patriot Act is enlightening.

b. Older technology that raises this question is the Clipper Chip

c. Newer technologies: Is there what James Moor calls an “ethics gap”, i.e., technology developed without consideration of the ethical implications of that technology.

i. Body scans

ii. Automobile black boxes

iii. RFID tags in passports

c. Content Control vs. Free Speech

i. Question: Is Free Speech an Absolute or a Conditional Right?

ii. Spam

a. contrast spam to junk mail. How is it the same? Different?

iii. Pornography

a. Should we censor pornographic web sites?

b. Child pornography

i. Look at CIPA: Child Internet Protection Act

c. Interesting legal cases and attempts at making laws, most of which have been overturned (see Tavani text).

iv. Hate web sites and hate speech

a. Should we censor hate web sites?

v. Filtering programs

a. What are filtering programs?

b. How do they work? What is filtered? Who decides?

c. Should libraries have filtering programs on their

computers

i. There are interesting cases in the courts around this issue (United States v. American Library Association, March, 2003).

d. Digital Divide: See Warshauer and Thorseth references

i. Local – within the US ( see NTIA references)

a. What is it based on ? Economics? Literacy?

ii. Global—across countries

a. The role of the Internet in developing countries

i. Issues of Cultural Differences

ii. Issues of infrastructure

iii. Racial inequities

iv. Gender inequities

a. See the work of Gumbus and Grodzinsky in the role of

gender bias in the workplace.

b. Another interesting topic is to discuss the role of gender in

computer game interfaces.

i. How are men portrayed?

ii. How are women portrayed?

v. Disability inequities

a. Equity of access on computer hardware

b. Equity of access on web sites?

i. Are web sites disability accessible

ii. Look at the World wide web Consortium web site

e. Privacy

i. Why is privacy important?

a. Privacy as a social good

i. Is it only a social good for a democracy?

ii. This question could lead to one on a global perspective on privacy.

1. Look at China, North Korea, countries in the former Eastern Bloc and Latin America for examples.

b. Privacy as an individual good

ii. Privacy is not in the US Constitution

a. From where does our privacy protection come?

i. Look at the 3rd and 4th amendments of the US Constitution

ii. Warren and Brandeis article “A Right to Privacy” published in the Harvard Law Review in 1890.

iii. Discuss the concept of a zone of privacy

iii. Gathering personal information

a. Question: What is the difference between confidential personal information and non-confidential personal information?

i. Should there be some protection for the latter in cyberspace?

1. Kinds of information: divorce records including bank information: thieves send for checks

2. Identity theft.

3. oogle in your telephone number and see what is revealed about you.

4. Do a google search on yourself.

b. Data mining: Finding patterns based on transaction information

i. Should buyers be informed on this secondary use of their information?

ii. Should they be allowed to opt out?

c. Data merging: Merging records of multiple databases to create a more complete source of information

i. Is this illegal?

ii. What are the restrictions against creating these computer profiles

d. Matching records

i. Are we innocent until proven guilty or through matching records, are we guilty until proven innocent?

ii. Matching fingerprints to lists of suspected

terrorists

iii. Matching pictures of people entering the Super Bowl to pictures of terrorists

iv. What is the potential for false identification?

1. What is the recourse for those accused?

iv. Privacy policies

a. Private policies: Is there an expectation of Privacy

i. At work?

ii. At university?

iii. A good way to frame this discussion is around email monitoring.

b. Legislation in the US

i. Privacy Act (1974)

ii. Electronic Communications Privacy Act (1986)

iii. Video Privacy Protection Act (1988)

iv. Health Insurance, Portability and Accountability

Act (1996)

v. Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (2000)

vi. Real ID Act (2005)

c. It is interesting to contrast this privacy legislation to the privacy

legislation put forth by the European Union.

v. Privacy enhancing tools

a. PGP- Pretty good privacy (there is a web site)

b. PET- Privacy enhancing tools

c. Encryption

f. Property Rights

i. What is Intellectual Property and how is it protected?

a. Copyright

i. Examine the initial intent of copyright law and how it was modified.

b. Patent

c. Trade Secrets

d. Use a coke bottle or some other soft drink bottle to illustrate each of these protection devices.

e. In this discussion it is interesting to emphasize the differences among the three forms of protection and the motivation for these laws.

ii. New Models for Digital Intellectual Property

a. Creative Common License – Larry Lessig

i. Involves intellectual property on the web; what

you can and cannot borrow in building a web site

b. Digital Rights Management (DRM) and Fair Use

i. DRM uses technological measures to prevent the distribution of intellectual property

1. What is the implication for Fair Use?

iii. Open source software (see Grodzinsky, Miller, Wolf)

a. Studies of the Free Software Foundation web site, will give you articles by Richard Stallman and the founding of GNU free software.

b. It will also give you information about the licensing of Free Software.

c. For articles on Open source software and its break from Stallman and the Free Software Foundation, see Eric Raymond’s:

The Cathedral and the Bazaar

Homesteading the Noosphere

The Magic Cauldron

d. The last two are particularly good for economic classes and classes in social theory.

iv. P2P networks and file sharing

a. Sharing of music files has become a very important issue especially to college students

i. The Verizon case is an interesting example of an Internet Service Provider that refused to give up names of its members to the Recording Industry, and how it challenged the provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that the RIAA tried to use against it. ( See Grodzinsky and Tavani)

ii. Look at the Apple model of distribution of music over iTunes

iii. Look at other distribution models (see Litman)

3. Impact on Human Life

Issues of interest in this section include: identity, biometrics, professional responsibility and accountability, the workplace, virtual community, humans and machines and shaping information technology for the future. These issues lend themselves nicely to science, religious studies, sociology, and philosophy and psychology classes. Topics on what it means to be human and online identity can generate a lively discussion.

a. Cyborgs and Transhumans

i. What does it mean to be human? Nanotechnology, virtual reality and embedded technology all have ethical dimensions that will impact how we understand what it means to be “human”.

ii. Artificial Intelligence

a. Do computers think?

i. Is it the same as human “thinking”?

b. What are Transhumans

ii. Nick Bostrom, of Oxford University, has done a lot of work in this field and has a website.

iii. Robotics

a. Look at films involving robots: Spielberg’s Artificial

Intelligence; Terminator; Star Wars

b. Questions: If we build robots to be like people, should

we give them free will? Should we program them with pain? If we give them free will and they want freedom, should they be free?

iv. Nanotechnology

a. Computer chips are getting smaller and smaller

b. Positive uses

i. Artificial limbs

ii. Restorative human functions

c. Negative uses?

i.What should the limitations be?

d.. Should we be going in this direction?

v. Who will shape society in the 21st century?

a. Kurweil has written many books on this

i. See The Age of Spiritual Machines:When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence

b. Identity and Community

i. On line communities

a. Virtual reality

b. Rape in cyberspace (see Lambda Moo and Julian Dibble)

ii. Self-expression

a. instant messaging

b. blogs

iii. Sense of self: Who are we in cyberspace?

a. Core identity

b. Exploring identity

c. Multiple windows/ multiple selves?

i. Sherry Turkel has done interesting work in this area.

iv. Questions for discussion:

a. What is our responsibility as users to our online community?

b. Where we are going in the 21st century?

c. Reorganization of Work

i. Surveillance in the workplace

a. who owns your networks in the workplace?

b. Should email be monitored?

a. What is your expectation of privacy in the workplace?

b. Is surveillance in the workplace “fair?”

ii. Telecommuting: How has technology changed how we do our work?

a. Job sharing

b. Disability access

c. Outsourcing

d. Repetitive strain injuries and ergonomics in the workplace

iii. Ethics in the workplace (see Gumbus- Business ethics module on this site)

d. Whistleblowing / errors

i. What kind of technological errors deserve to be made public

ii. Who are whistleblowers? How can they protect themselves and the public at the same time?

a. There are several good films on this: Norma Rae, The Insider,

b. Several recent cases: Enron, Arthur Anderson, BART, Therac 25

II. Suggestions for classroom activities:

a. Ethics Quiz: I have developed an Ethics Quiz that can be tailored to your area. It is posted on the website. In this quiz, students are asked to determine if an issue is ethical or not. It is a binary decision: yes or no. It takes 5 minutes of class time. Then we count up the votes for each question, and students give the reasons for their votes. Two things inevitably happen: 1. Students find it hard to say a decision is ethical or not. They want to say “maybe” or “it depends”. I am firm in making them say yes or no. 2. Ultimately, after all the discussion, students realize that each question involves an ethical dilemma on some level. The purpose of this quiz is to sensitize students to ethical issues, i.e., to realize that most decisions in life have an ethical component associated with them. This activity is a great icebreaker in class.

b. Written Assignments: Using the ethical process, present a proposal stating your observations, assumptions and value judgments. Present counter arguments and discuss why you could not accept them. Support your arguments with ethical theory.

i. These can either be short one-two page papers, or longer 3-5 page essays.

ii. The outlines for the papers can be developed in class.

iii. Rubrics for grading papers are on this website.

c. Small Collaborative Group Activities:

i. Divide the class in pro / con groups around issues. Have each group write the proposal, e.g. we should abolish the death penalty in this state; we should not abolish the death penalty in this state. Each group then develops its arguments and presents them to the class with its opposing group. The class judges the effectiveness of the arguments.

i. This can also be set up as a courtroom with lawyers, a judge, and a jury. Each side presents its arguments and the jury returns a verdict.

ii. Chairs: There are three chairs in the front of the room. The professor writes a position statement on the board. One chair is the pro chair, the other the con chair and the third is a Meta ethics chair. Whoever sits in the chair can only argue from that position. The metaethicist observes how the other two are arguing: e.g., this person is offering a utilitarian argument; or, this person is not supporting his/her argument and is appealing to emotion. A person can only speak when sitting in the chair, so there is a lot of shuffling around in this exercise, but it can be a very energizing way to lead a discussion.

iii. Have students chose a short story or film that depicts some ethical issue within your classroom. In small groups, have them design a video or short scene that depicts the ethical choices that the characters face. The group should lead a discussion around these choices.

iv. Team Presentations: I have found that having teams introduce the topic of the day in a PowerPoint, or other presentation format (some use illustrative film clips), is a very effective means of energizing the class. This format also makes me aware of what issues in the topic are of particular interest and/or concern for my students. In these presentations, they are required to discuss the Readings assigned for that day and to engage the class in discussion. This format is very popular with my students who are seniors and can handle the responsibility that this activity entails. It is difficult for the instructor, who then has to fill in the important issues on the topic that were not discussed. Instructors could check presentation outlines in advance to make sure the topic is covered thoroughly. I have not found this to be necessary. I usually follow this activity with a small collaborative exercise that applies what they have learned.

d. On line Activities:

i. Discussion Boards: For each half of the semester, I have each student post at least one news article concerning an ethical issue involving technology. Other students are responsible for discussing the posted article. Part of their grade is based on their participation on the discussion board. This board takes off and there is a lot of interesting discussion around the articles. Students relate them back to class discussion as well.

ii. Discussion Boards, Readings, Student Journals: Students who present readings in class post three questions on the Readings Discussion Board. They will center their class presentation of the reading on these questions. The rest of the class responds to the questions in their online student journals after reading the material. Their journal entries combined with their responses in class count towards a classroom grade.

iii. Learning Units: I have created learning units around the topics I present in class. These help the students focus on what is important in the lesson and are always on the Blackboard website for later use.

Acknowledgement: I would like to thank Professor Steve Lilley, Associate Professor of Sociology who has taught Computer Ethics, Society and Technology as an Honors course with me here at SHU. The organization of topics is one that we have fine-tuned together.

Professor Herman Tavani, Professor of Philosophy, Rivier College has been a co-author and friend.

Bibliography:

Articles and Books on specific topics:

Grodzinsky, Frances S. (2000). “Equity of Access: Adaptive Technology,” Science and

Engineering Ethics, Vol. 6, No. 2, 2000.

Grodzinsky, Frances S. (2000). “The Development of the ‘Ethical’ ICT Professional

And The Vision of an Ethical On-line Society: How Far Have We Come and Where are

We Going?” Computers and Society, Vol. 30, No. 1, March.

Grodzinsky, F and Tavani, H. “P2P Networks and the Verizon v. RIAA

Case: Implications for Personal Privacy and Intellectual Property”, Ethics and Information Technology : Springer Netherlands ISSN: 1388-1957 (Paper) 1572-8439 (Online), DOI: 10.1007/s10676-006-0012-4, Issue:  Volume 7, Number 4 ,Pages: 243 - 250 Title:  Surveillance and Privacy, Published May 2006.

Grodzinsky, F.S., Miller K., and Wolf, M.J. (2003) “Ethical Issues in Open Source Software,” Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, I, 4, pp. 193-205, Troubadour, Publishing, London.

Grodzinsky, F, and Gumbus, A, “Internet and Productivity: ethical

perspectives on workplace behaviour”, Information, Communications and

Ethics in Society, 3: 249-256, 2006.

Gumbus A, Grodzinsky F, “Gender Bias in Internet Employment: A Study

of Career Advancement Opportunities for Women in the Field of ICT”

Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, Vol 2,

Issue 3, July 2004.

Johnson, Deborah G. (2001). Computer Ethics. 3rd. ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Johnson, Deborah G. (2000). "Democratic Values and the Internet." In D.

Langford,edInternet Ethics. New York: St. Martin's Press, pp. 180-199.

Kurzweil, Ray (1999) The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence. New York: Penguin.

Litman, J. (2004), Sharing and Stealing, .

Moor, James H. (2001) “Just Consequentialism and Computing”, in Readings in Cyberethics, eds. Spinello and Tavani, Jones and Bartlett.

Moor, James H. (1998). “Reason, Relativity, and Responsibility in Computer Ethics.” Computers and Society, Vol. 28, No. 1, 1998, pp. 14-21.

Negroponte, Nicholas (1995). Being Digital. New York: Alred Knopf Books.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). (1995). Falling

Through the Net: A Survey of the Have-nots in Rural and Urban America. Washington,

DC: US Department of Commerce. Retrieved from

.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). (1999). Falling

Through the Net: Defining the Digital Divide. Washington, DC: US Department of

Commerce. Retrieved from ,

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). (2000). Falling

Through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion. Washington, DC: US Department of

Commerce. Retrieved from .

Nissenbaum, Helen (1994). “Computing and Accountability,” Communications of the ACM, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 73-80.

Perens, B. (2002) “Debian Social Contract.” social_contract.html.

Perens, Bruce (2006) “The Emerging Economic Paradigm of Open Source”, .

Raymond, E.S. (2000) “Homesteading the Noosphere.” .

Raymond, E.S. (2001) “The Cathedral and the Bazaar,” in Readings in Cyberethics, eds. Spinello and Tavani. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.

Raymond, E.S. (2002) “The Magic Cauldron” v. 2.0. .

Rheingold, Howard (2001). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic

Frontier. Revised ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Stallman, Richard (2001) “Copyright versus Community in the Age of Computer Networks” .

Stallman, Richard (2002) “Linux, GNU, and Freedom,” .

Stallman, Richard (1985) “The GNU Manifesto” .

Stallman, Richard (1998) “Why ‘Free Software’ is Better than ‘Open Source’,” .

Stallman, Richard (1992) “Why Software Should be Free,” .

Stallman, Richard (1994) “Why Software Should Not Have Owners,” .

Shade, L.R. ( 2002). Gender and Community in the Social Construction of the Internet.

New York: Peter Lang.

Spinello, Richard A. (2001). “Internet Service Providers and Defamation: New Standards of Liability.” In R. A. Spinello and H. T. Tavani, eds. Readings in CyberEthics. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett, pp. 198-209.

Sunstein, Cass R. (2002). . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press

Tavani, Herman T., and Frances S. Grodzinsky (2002). “Cyberstalking, Personal Privacy, and Moral Responsibility,” Ethics and Information Technology, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 123-132.

Tavani, Herman T. (2000). “Defining the Boundaries of Computer Crime: Piracy, Break-ins and Sabotage in Cyberspace.” Computers and Society, Vol. 30, No. 4, 2000, pp. 3-9.

Tavani, Herman T. (2003). “Ethical Reflections on the Digital Divide,” Journal of

Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 99-108.

The Open Source Definition (2006), version 1.9 .

Thorseth, M. (2005). “ IT, multiculturalism and global democracy—ethical challenges”,

Institute for philosophy, pedagogy and rhetoric, Copenhagen University. Papers for a

workshop on positive discrimination, March 18, 2005. Retrieved from

,

Torvalds, Linus (2006a) “Re: Linux vs. GPL v3—Dead Copyright Holders,” Linux-kernel mail archives. Jan 25, 2006. .

Torvalds, Linus (2006b) “Re: Linux vs. GPL v3—Dead Copyright Holders,” Linux-kernel mail archives. Jan 27, 2006. .

Warschauer, M. (2002). “Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide,” First Monday, Vol. 7,

No. 7. Available at: .

Warschauer, Mark (2003). Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital

Divide. MIT Press.

Wheatley, Malcolm (2004) “The Myths of Open Source,” CIO Magazine, March 1, 2004. .

White, Michelle (2002). "Regulating Research: The Problem of Theorizing Research in

LambdaMOO," Ethics and Information Technology, Vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 55-70.

Wolf, M.J., K. Bowyer, D. Gotterbarn, and K. Miller (2002) Open Source Software: Intellectual Challenges to the Status Quo, panel presentation at 2002 SIGCSE Technical Symposium, SIGCSE Bulletin, 34(1), March, pp. 317-318 and data/resources/254/wholething.pdf.

Wolf, M.J. and Grodzinsky, F.S. (2006) “Good/Fast/Cheap: Contexts, Relationships and Professional Responsibility During Software Development,” Proceedings of the Symposium of Applied Computing 2006 (April).

World Wide Web Consortium,

General Texts:

Edgar, Stacey L. (2006) Morality and Machines. 2nd ed. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett.

Quinn, Michael (2006) Ethics for the Information Age. 2nd ed. Boston: Addison Wesley.

Spinello, R. (2006) Cyberethics. 3rd edition. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett.

Spinello, R. and Tavani, H. eds (2001) Readings in Cyberethics.

Tavani, Herman T. (2006). Ethics and Technology: Ethical Issues in an Age of

Information and Communication Technology. 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download