Here's an e-mail I got from Chaz:
Jerry, from the Lessig excerts you sent me:
"In cyberspace, because code is so plastic and so powerful, and because law is so feeble and (on an international scale) so rigid, code has a comparative regulatory advantage over law. A gap in legal regulation will therefore emerge, and code will fill that gap. Structures of regulation get codified in the architecture of the net, and these structures of regulation entail important values choices. Whether information will be kept private, whether encrypted speech is allowed, whether anonymity is permissible, whether access is open and free - these are all policy choices made by default by a structure of
code that has developed - unaware at times, and, generally, uncritically of the politics that code entails.
Some argue that this shows that government should simply get out of
the way. That government should let code regulate, and defer to its regulations in this space. [FN25] But this is quite unlikely. We shouldn't expect government simply to cede jurisdiction over cyberspace to Barlowtypes. [FN26] Instead, government will shift to a different regulatory technique. Rather than regulating behavior directly, government will regulate indirectly. Rather than making rules that apply to constrain individuals directly, government will make rules that require a change in code, so that code regulates differently. Code will become the government's tool. Law will regulate code, so that code constrains as government wants. [FN27]"
******
I think that says it all. He has no problem with dictating code design to achieve policy. Period. Also, he obviously understands the whole technical and business problem domains as they apply here. No snowing this cat! I think what Bill Gates and company have understood is the first paragraph quoted, but not the second.
I think your take on Lessig is correct, even conservatively stated.
Chaz
P.S. Feel free to post our sideband conversation if you want, I think it is directly to the point.
Gerald R. Lampton wrote:
> As someone else who has taken the time to read Lessig's work, I'd be
> curious to know what you think of him.
> Do you agree with my assessment?
> If not, I'd like to hear why, as I could be missing something.
> Jerry
>
|
