Sounds like Lawrence Lessig is correct. http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig/
In The Future of Ideas, Lawrence Lessig explains how the Internet revolution has produced a counterrevolution of devastating power and effect. The explosion of innovation we have seen in the environment of the Internet was not conjured from some new, previously unimagined technological magic; instead, it came from an ideal as old as the nation. Creativity flourished there because the Internet protected an innovation commons. The Internet's very design built a neutral platform upon which the widest range of creators could experiment. The legal architecture surrounding it protected this free space so that culture and information-the ideas of our era-could flow freely and inspire an unprecedented breadth of expression. But this structural design is changing-both legally and technically. This shift will destroy the opportunities for creativity and innovation that the Internet originally engendered. The cultural dinosaurs of our recent past are moving to quickly remake cyberspace so that they can better protect their interests against the future. Powerful conglomerates are swiftly using both law and technology to "tame" the Internet, transforming it from an open forum for ideas into nothing more than cable television on speed. Innovation, once again, will be directed from the top down, increasingly controlled by owners of the networks, holders of the largest patent portfolios, and, most invidiously, hoarders of copyrights. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Max Metral Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 7:47 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: [JDEV] Thoughts on AOL I guess I think that it's impossible for people to support Microsoft antitrust litigation and think that what AOL is doing is somehow different. I *don't* support the MSFT litigation at all (at least what it's become) but I actually think THIS is different given the media control that AOL now has. And what's more, in this case, AOL has already agreed to move towards interop. So unless they're talking complete smack (which they are), this move is incosistent and should be treated as such. I work for PeoplePC, we're not huge, but we have a decent member base and we have a ticker symbol, which is the important part for news. I'm trying to think of how we could help this battle with some statement that makes sense. If people think of anything, I'd love ideas. -----Original Message----- From: James Widman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2002 7:36 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [JDEV] Thoughts on AOL Thomas Muldowney wrote: > It is their network, and their resources, and I feel we need to >respect that. > I tend to agree, *but*.... anyone who has an internet connection can send email to AOL users; anyone can browse through web pages hosted by AOL; further, AOL/TW would certainly *like* everyone on the internet to chose the AIM client for their instant messaging needs. It's not like they're not prepared for a large number connections to Oscar (and correct me if I'm wrong, but connecting with "unauthorized software" has never even been a legal issue -- i.e., jabber people didn't get cease & desist orders, they just got met with unfriendly engineering and IP blocking, right?). It's just that they have this crappy double standard about how people are allowed to use the resources that they already offer up to the non-paying public, and it seems that a lot of people here (myself included) are wondering if we should respect *that* at all. _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
