Difference Between Kantianism And Rule Utilitarianism

In Google's private policy it states that they can scan their users' e-mails and collect other information on their users' profiles. This brings up the ethical question of weather or not it is ethical for Google to use their users' information to generate these ads (Gibbs, 2014). There are two ethical theories that will be applied Kantianism and Rule Utilitarianism. Kantianism is an ethical theory where it states that it does not treat people as a means to an end. Rule Utilitarianism states that it is ethical if the moral rules are applied universally and that is has to look at all the actions to find which results can have the greatest amount of happiness or unhappiness (Quinn, 2013). Under Kantianism and Rule Utilitarianism is it ethical?
First, to find out if it is ethical or not; details from each circumstance have to be looked at.
Google uses automated systems to scan their user's e-mails, their Google search history, Youtube views, Google Map requests, and their cookies. Google uses this information to generate ads that are relevant to the user. Gmail uses these ads to support their service and products. Users have to accept the private policy to enter their Google Account and opt-out. Google is forcing them to accept. Google could be violating the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act or FERPA (Gibbs, 2014), which is a law that allows parents to access their child's school records, helps the parents change these records, and gives the parents control of who sees these records (U.S. Department of Education,
2015). Kantianism is an ethical theory that applies moral rules universally. Another factor, in this theory, is duties. There are perfect and imperfect duties. Perfect duties you are obliged to do and imperfect duties come second to perfect duties. Telling the truth and preserving life is two examples of perfect duties. You have to treat people as a means to themselves and never a means to an end (Quinn, 2013). Google is using their users as a means to an end because they are collecting their users' information to generate relevant ads to make Google money. Google is making their users accept their private policy that it is using their information for this purpose. The only way the users can get into their e-mails is by accepting Google's policy. Google is receiving money by the ad companies and the ad companies are getting money because of these ads as well. Google and the ad companies are getting money by using their users' information (Gibbs, 2014). Google is using the people that do not want these ads as a means to an end as well as the ad companies. It is not ethical according to Kantianism (Quinn, 2013). Rule Utilitarianism is another ethical theory but this one is based on the overall happiness of everyone in that situation. You have to add all the happiness with the unhappiness to find out if it is ethical or not (Quinn, 2013). The entities that benefit from Google gathering information on their users are, the ad companies, Google, the users that want the ads, and law enforcement. Google also could be breaking the FERPA law. Law enforcement can get a court order to be able to scan a criminal's e-mail and use the information that Google has collected on the criminals (Gibbs, 2014). The harms are to the people that do not want ads, the people that don't want their information taken, it is hard to opt-out of having the users' information taken, the criminals are harmed because law enforcement can use this information. This could be ethical because the amount of harm to the people that get ads and the people that don't want their information taken. It is not as much as the benefits that law enforcement get by getting criminals off the streets and protecting citizens that have a possibility of getting harm by these criminals but if Google is breaking the FERPA law then this could even it out and put this to a stand still. Google is using their users as a means to an end by collecting information about there users and getting money from these ads. This is unethical according to Kantianism because Google should treat their users as a means in themselves. Under Rule Utilitarianism this is ethical because the overall benefit of having law enforcement capable of getting a court order to search criminal's e-mails and use the information Google has collected to protect citizens against criminals (Quinn, 2013). The harms were out weighed by the benefits only if Google did not break the FERPA law. If Google did then this would put it about equal in benefits and harms.