Questions
SOI-BBS
soi-wg@wide.ad.jp
Course Info
Special Lectures
Copyright
- Propertyh
- Internet Skeptics
- gfree internethis
too costly
- Napster
- common-carrier
lines
- <1>
- Picture(1)
- Picture(2)
- Picture(3)
- Picture(4)
- grearranging
deck chairs on the Titanich
- Picture(5)
- Picture(6)
- hopeless
- too soon.
- <2>
- OSCON
- Google(1)
- Google(2)
- Google(3)
- Google(4)
- Google(5)
- Google(6)
- Google(7)
- <3>
- Picture(7)
- Picture(8)
- Picture(9)
- <Copyright
Wars>
- New applications
of old technologies
- New threats
to copyright
- Napster
- Picture(9)
- Picture(10)
- Picture(11)
- Valenti:with
the click of a buttonwith the speed of light to 6 billion people around
the world
- ginstantaneouslyh
- gYou canft
compete with freeh
- ga terrorist
warh
- Responses:
- DMCA
- Broadcast
flag
- digital vigilantes
- Mandated
gfritzh chips
- Barrett:
gpolice state in every computerh
- for what?
- gto stop
the harmh
- two perspectives:
short term & long term
- short term
- content owners
claim:
- gfreeh displaces
gsalesh
- e.g.,100
CDs for free =100 fewer CDs sold
- what is the
actual harm?5x sales downloaded for free-5%
- consequence?
- drop in sales
by 5%
- 5x free ?>
5% decline
- so a harm,
but small compared to the IT industry
- long term
- Focus:
- gYou canft
compete with freeh
- really?
- water
- legal research
- my lectures
- filled with
examples
- same with
content too
- soon.
- Our problem:
we are responding to architecture as it is now
- grearranging
deck chairs on the Titanich
- As it is
now:
- cheap disk
spacethin pipes
- consequence:
hoard
- Soon:
- cheaper disk
spacemuch fatter pipes
- ubiquitous,
persistent broadband connection
- wireless
- not 3G
- meshed network
wireless
- everything
with electricity
- streaming
content
- How compete
in this world?
- First: streamed
content can be controlled
- Second: competition
thus about convenience
- maybe pay-per-view,
maybe ads, maybe subscription
- business
model
- Google e.g.
- But can you
beat free?
- Picture(12)
- Good policy:
- Without internet
lockdown
- We could
get protected IP
- If we answered
the problem in the interim.
- Interim answer:
- Same as we
always have.
- 1900ssheet
musicnapsterizedplayer piano
- gthefth
- no gthefth
- compulsory
license
- 1950sbroadcast
TVnapsterizedcable TV
- gthefth
- no gthefth
- compulsory
license
- could do
the same here
- Nielsen:
5 year moratorium
- gour propertyh
- (B) Platforms
- three stories
- 1934organ
recitalEmpire State BuildingLong Island
- less static
- higher fidelity
- RCA
- gI thought
Armstrong would invent some kind of a filter to remove static from our
AM radio. I didn't think hefd start a revolution -- start up a whole damn
new industry to compete with RCA.h
- FCC
- patents
- 6 years
- 1954
- 1964Paul
BaranRandDepartment of Defense
- gpacket
switchingh
- AT&T
- (1) gwill
never possibly workh
- (2) gdamned
if wefll allow the creation of a competitor to ourself.h
- (3) cable
guys
- 1990sAT&Tfs
Excite@Homecable internet servicestream TV to computers
- 1999Daniel
Sommers:gWe didn't spend $56 billion on a cable network to have the blood
sucked out of our veinsh
- networks
of the past:
- smart networks
- power to
protect against new competition
- internet:
- end-to-end
- simple networkssmart
applications
- neutral
platform
- new ideas
- networks
cannot protect themselves
- e.g.
- electricity
grids
- highways
- but increasingly:
- threat to
neutrality
- gour propertyh
- networks
architecting network as they want
- gpolicy
based routingh
- MS Xbox
- Disney movie
- content
and applications as network owner allows
- Strange
bedfellows
- MicrosoftDisneyeBayMedia
Access Project
- "government
[to] ensure" the "ability of consumers and business to communicate with
one another ... without obstruction from network service providers."
- govft to
assure neutral platforms
- LeggMason:
gkey policy issue c the extent to which the network provider can restrict
the customers' use of the network."
- again: conflict
over property
- balanced
property right
- increased
innovation
- <Conclusion>
- extreme
ideal about property
- confuses
both content and platform debate
- innovation
of network produced by balance
- not extreme
- yet policy
in America increasingly extreme