The Internet Under Siege
[FAC: The following snip is from an article in the Nov.-Dec. issue of Foreign Policy Magazine, the url for which is posted below. Is Lessig on the right track here, or is he off on his own journey in some other land. Personally, I think there is merit to much of what he's saying. In fact, much of what he's writing about has actually been discussed here in these boards in the past, already. Is it possible that we will wind up with two different forms of "internet" experience, one being open and the other closed per subscription of each user's choice? Lots of room for discussion here. We see that happening already in some cable tv service architectures, and in certain on line services, such as AOL and the seeds of what MSFT has in store for the future. Opinions and comments are welcome, as always. Enjoy.]
---from the article:
Who owns the Internet? Until recently, nobody. That's because, although the Internet was "Made in the U.S.A.," its unique design transformed it into a resource for innovation that anyone in the world could use. Today, however, courts and corporations are attempting to wall off portions of cyberspace. In so doing, they are destroying the Internet's potential to foster democracy and economic growth worldwide.
By Lawrence Lessig
The Internet revolution has ended just as surprisingly as it began. None expected the explosion of creativity that the network produced; few expected that explosion to collapse as quickly and profoundly as it has. The phenomenon has the feel of a shooting star, flaring unannounced across the night sky, then disappearing just as unexpectedly. Under the guise of protecting private property, a series of new laws and regulations are dismantling the very architecture that made the Internet a framework for global innovation.
Neither the appearance nor disappearance of this revolution is difficult to understand. The difficulty is in accepting the lessons of the Internet's evolution. The Internet was born in the United States, but its success grew out of notions that seem far from the modern American ideals of property and the market. Americans are captivated by the idea, as explained by Yale Law School professor Carol Rose, that the world is best managed "when divided among private owners" and when the market perfectly regulates those divided resources. But the Internet took off precisely because core resources were not "divided among private owners." Instead, the core resources of the Internet were left in a "commons." It was this commons that engendered the extraordinary innovation that the Internet has seen. It is the enclosure of this commons that will bring about the Internet's demise.
Continued at:
foreignpolicy.com |
