We’ve grown accustomed to assuming that computerized devices are always better than older technologies. That’s true of most devices, but it’s probably not true of voting machines. When it comes to our elections, it would be a good idea to follow the KISS principle: Keep It Simple, Stupid.
The advocates of network neutrality regulations are working very hard to create a sense of crisis, but is there really a need to regulate the Internet?
France recently mandated Apple to open up its iTunes technology. But the right approach is for the state to remain neutral, neither forcing companies to open their proprietary technologies to others, nor preventing rivals from building compatible devices if they can figure out how to do so without the incumbent’s help.
Just like news and opinion is free on the Internet today, so will new music be tomorrow.
A new telecom bill would probably make things worse than they already are. For supporters of free markets, the best telecom bill is probably no telecom bill.
If it’s absurd to require newspapers to sell their news, sports, and business sections separately so that consumers can get just what they want, how is forcing cable TV to offer channels “a la carte” any less nuts?
Security researchers recently discovered that digital rights management (DRM) software bundled with some of Sony BMG CDs will, among other things, send information about the user’s listening habits back to remote servers. This is simply not a good business strategy. Smart businesses treat their customers as cherished assets.
In the battle over control of the Internet, it’s not that the U.S. government manages the Internet better than other countries would, it’s that it barely manages the Internet at all, and it’s important that it stay that way.
Copy protection in iTunes and iPods treats honest customers like criminals while locking them into Apple products. So why does the recording industry insist on it?
Does copyright infringement involve creating an unauthorized copy, or accessing that copy once created? If mere copying is copyright infringement, then Google Print is illegal–and so is the Internet for that matter.
Does banning cell phones in cars really improve road safety? How about banning chihuahuas?
Does Microsoft hold the patent on the iPod’s click wheel even though Apple invented it?
Google Print will let you search the full text of every book ever printed–unless the law gets in the way, that is.
Mandatory “net neutrality” rules are unnecessary because good old-fashioned competition is sufficient to ensure an open future for the Internet.
Now that the FCC’s “broadcast flag” has been struck down, broadcasters would do well to stop obsessing over exaggerated piracy threats and focus on competing with cable and satellite.
Last year the Ninth Circuit accepted Grokster’s argument that because it has no knowledge of what files are traded and no ability to filter them, it cannot be held liable as Napster was for infringement. The Supreme Court should not be so gullible.
Digital rights management technologies may yet prove an effective piracy deterrent, and companies should be free to deploy them. But requiring customers to comply with them on pain of criminal penalties is a step too far.
European consumers, like their American counterparts, have every opportunity to choose the media platform that best serves their needs. EU bureaucrats should get out of the way and let them do so.
As more and more people turn to the Internet for their news and information, it is vital that online journalists not become second-class citizens.
Source: AFF Doublethink Online | Kaavya Ramesh
Source: AFF Doublethink Online | Hadley Heath