Luddism 2.0, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Web
Andres starts out with the traditional apology.
Destroying machines and the history of luddism – at one point there were more british soldiers fighting luddites than fighting in the Napoleon wars. Historical = Luddite 1.0.
The Difference Engine and the first computers – Charles Babbage & co.
There will always be some luddism – in terms of technophobia (eg Daily Mail). Not just Daily Mail, but many other newspapers and content on all mediums (information, articles, and editorials) equal a steady drip of anti technology / technophobic statements.
Dystoian future gazing
- minimal public funds for research
- no broadband investment
- draconian IP
oh wait. the future is here.
The Crossover Point
Peter K. Yu
Same issues – downloads / sharing. Graduated response = digital guillotine for consumers. Piracy in the US in the 1800′s (copyright pirates of foreign novels such as Dickens). Martin Chuzzlewit as Dickens response. Clay report and the mutilation and alteration of works by US publishers of UK works (cut Dickens down to a more readable 300 pages from 800). US authors fought back as well as being hurt by the underselling of foreign works (hard to compete).
So there is a trajectory from piracy to IP respectful (such as BRIC countries). This is the crossover point.
- the finish line keeps on moving (FTAs / bilateral treaties keep ratcheting up the standard for being “ip compliant”)
- uncertainty of crossover – where is the tipping point?
Where is the crossover point? Starting The Crossover Point Project
Comapring US, Germany and Japan (crossed over) with BRIC and Nigeria and Malaysia.
Filesharing as a war between humans and machines.
Where is copyright? It’s artificial an depends on laws. It’s complex.
What’s the future for copyright? How to move beyond it
ME: For a more serious view of this by Yu, see From Pirates to Partners: Protecting Intellectual Property in China in the Twenty-First Century among his other papers.
Net Neutrality More than Economics
Net neutrality is 10 years old this year. The end of end-to-end? (this death toll has been going for ten years).
Europe response to net neutrality is that not a problem here “we have better competition law”. Bush era = absolute fantasy era in terms of telecoms public policy, regulation, competition and anti-trust.
24kbps is effective rate of what ISPs provide (analysis masons for ofcom (2009)). BBC iPlayer runs at 850kbps. ISPs don’t actually provision what they advertise in terms of broadband.
Accurate information will allow people to see through the broadband / telecoms veil. more information is good for people in terms of knowing what is blocked (human rights / net neutrality / DPI) and what they are getting (market / consumer protection / competition / net neutrality).