OPTION ONE: You are on a committee that reports directly to the Government of Canada. The Government has asked you to comment on Internet protection rules concerning hate speech. Based on your recommendations, a Bill will be drafted. The Government specifically wants to know your recommendations regarding whether people should be free to post whatever they want online (including controversial matters such as legal pornography, hateful comments, and instructions on how to build weapons). State your argument with at least four supporting premises as to why or why not there should be more censorship online. If you support some level of censorship, discuss what the structure of this censorship should look like. Discuss the potential counter-arguments that a virtue ethicist, hedonistic ethicist, state consequentialist, deontologist, role ethicist, or anarchist ethicist might ask you (if your argument agrees with one of these theories then identify the theory you agree with and discuss how the other theorists might argue against you).

OPTION TWO: You are on a committee that reports directly to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office. You have been asked to comment on intellectual property rules governing software, specifically, do you think all software should be free? State your argument with at least four supporting premises. Discuss the potential counter-arguments that would be asked by labour theorists, utilitarian theorists, personality theorists, believers of the free software movement, and believers of the open software movement (if your argument agrees with one of these theories then identify the theory you agree with and discuss how the other theorists might argue against you).