Author: john

Net Neutrality Debate Again Descends Into Shouting, Farce

Techdirt: Net Neutrality Debate Again Descends Into Shouting, Farce

Techdirt: Net Neutrality Debate Again Descends Into Shouting, Farce

Techdirt is, perhaps accurately, decrying the “not wholly accurate, ideological soundbites [argued] from both sides” in the network neutrality debate. This issue is so technically and socially complicated, that it is quite surprising to me that debate tends to become two sided.

Besides the technical issues of how a “neutral” network might work and the economic issues of stimulating innovation while giving network owners incentive to expand their network, there are a host of other social issues to consider. These include comparisons with other similar historical circumstances, addressing concerns of privacy on the network, and analyses of network penetration and the incentives that providers have to limit access.

Perhaps the net neutrality debate needs a forum where experts on all facets of the issue can contribute to our understanding of the problem.

Discussion of Gillespie’s “Wired Shut”

One of the issues we discussed a bit was the “irrational fears” on the part of content industries (specifically motion picture and music) that all of their sources of revenue will disappear absent some forms of digital rights protection. I wonder if there is also perhaps “irrational fear” on the part of those of us who worry about potential for rights lost through technological changes proposed by the content industry (myself absolutely included!).Yet, between these two “irrational fears,” there may be some value in the dialog that is taking place. Copyright law and technological standards evolve so slowly that finding a compromise between these two seemingly polar positions might be an important part in the production of law and social consensus (despite the drawbacks inherent in law made through compromise).

Further, I’m personally interested in the role that this dialog plays in informing the public about copyright law, and in its role creating norms of compliance. Do people listen to the Valentis and Gillespies of the copyright debate? How do their arguments impact their actions? If the “average Joe” isn’t listening, are those who can really make an impact listening (legislators, academics, creative types, industry people)? What impact does it have on them, and any potential policy?

[This post is part of a summer reading group, following a discussion of Tarleton Gillespie’s Book Wired Shut.]

Everyones a celebrity in this post-privacy age

Everyones a celebrity in this post-privacy age | CNET News.com

Mena Trott, who, with her husband, Ben, developed Movable Type, a software system for publishing blogs, says “control” is a better word than “privacy” for defining oneself in different situations on the Web.

“We think blogging is sharing the stuff you care about with the people you care about,” Trott says. “It comes down to control. They may or may not use it. But people want control.”

Exactly right. While many, myself included, don’t have a problem with posting personal information on a social networking site or blog, it is quite a different thing to have information automatically gathered.

I think people intuitively realize this privacy difference between crafting an online identity and the saving of one’s Internet history or searches. Another way to express this difference might be between the choice to posting information, where there can’t be much expectation of privacy, and the passive gathering and saving of information through an unspecified service use agreement–this is where many are demanding increased protection.

AT&T to target pirated content – Los Angeles Times

AT&T to target pirated content – Los Angeles Times

The motion picture industry and AT&T have agreed to start working on a method to block the transmission of copyrighted content.  It’s not clear how this will technically be carried out (without degrading performance), especially within individual’s rights to privacy and free speech. This will be a story to watch closely.