Samir’s Selection 06/06/2013 (p.m.)
The end of Internet history? – Fortune Tech
“Is history destined to repeat itself? Is the great revolutionary medium of our times, the Internet, destined to follow the path of its ancestors, radio and the telephone, a path of increasing consolidation and uncompetitiveness, leading over time, to slow stagnation?
we’re much more suspicious of centralized power than Americans were in, say, the 1930s…
Much of “The Master Switch” is an argument that things might in fact, be fundamentally different this time around; I just don’t take it as a certainty.
1. the Internet was a deeply radical invention.. the first communications system to embody, technically, what I call a “separations principle” – a separation between functions like transport, applications, content and so on
2. the capital markets nowadays aren’t quite so eager to take the side of size
3. Today, Americans have more of a taste for smallness and decentralization…
But it is only half of the story. For the argument that the old patterns of consolidation and domination will repeat themselves is far stronger than…
Take three economic principles: Network effects, economies of scale and the state of high initial/low marginal costs markets… “
America’s original startup: The phone company – Dec. 22, 2010
“… the dispute should also be taken as a crucial parable for communications policy makers. More than anything, it showed what kind of political advantage a discriminatory network can confer. When the major channels for moving information are loyal to one party, its effects, while often invisible, can be profound.”
Who Controls the Internet? – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“the important role of government in maintaining Internet law and order while debunking the claims of techno-utopianism that have been espoused by theorists such as Thomas Friedman…
How does fair-use law work? – Slate Magazine
It is all about justification, and this is a key to understanding it. Fair use allows use of a work that would ordinarily constitute infringement, if that use is justified (or excused, if you like) with some compelling reason…
the right to quote makes writing easier-and copyright, after all, is supposed to help people to write, not make it harder for them…
the use is considered “fair” because there is some good reason, or many, for it…
1. secondary creativity
2. situations in which bargaining for a license is likely to break down or prove impractical
3. fair use is a safety valve that prevents copyright from curbing free speech or freedom of the press…
the animating spirit of fair use is that courts may recognize any public-minded justification. The real question is whether the justification is strong enough to justify denying the copyright owner her usual right to demand permission…
as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once put it, judges decide first and write their reasons later…
In the big picture, answering that question means weighing, on the one hand, the broader freedom to produce art like this-the freedom to be Fairey-against the sense that too much of the original was taken without permission and that the original photographer or his employer, the Associated Press, deserves to be compensated.
Network Neutrality FAQ
Origins of the Debate
Relationship to Market Power
This Is Your Brain on Coffee – NYTimes.com
Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.