Kindle 2.0

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Jonathan Zittrain <zittrain () law harvard edu>
Date: February 9, 2009 12:23:23 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Kindle 2.0 [for IP?]

Amazon has just introduced its second-generation Kindle book  
substitute.  As a reader, I'm intrigued -- I can download a bunch of  
books and apparently use it for days without a charge.  Looking at the  
overall IT ecosystem, I'm also intrigued, but for opposite reasons.

The downloading takes place over an "EVDO modem with fallback to  
1xRTT; utilizes Amazon Whispernet to provide U.S wireless coverage via  
Sprint's 3G high-speed data network."[1]  The connectivity needed to  
download books and browsing certain other sites is free of charge:  
"The Kindle Store enables you to download, display and use on your  
Device a variety of digitized electronic content, such as books,  
subscriptions to magazines, newspapers, journals and other  
periodicals, blogs, RSS feeds, and other digital content, [*]as  
determined by Amazon from time to time[*]."[2]  ... "Amazon provides  
wireless connectivity free of charge to you for certain content  
shopping and downloading services on your Device. You may be charged a  
fee for wireless connectivity for your use of other wireless services  
on your Device, such as Web browsing and downloading of personal  
files, should you elect to use those services."[3]  So there appears  
to be a more generic Web browser -- how locked down it is I'm not  
sure, but the overall platform does not allow third party apps, and I  
wonder if it even allows things like Flash -- and Amazon will charge  
fees TBD for going outside the sandbox.

Suppose that Amazon does indeed get to (1) choose what Web sites its  
users can visit or (2) choose what Web sites will incur a wireless  
access fee (to the user).  I'm curious whether people think either  
practice should be banned or limited by regulation, e.g. as a  
violation of network neutrality.  If a standard ISP did this, would it  
be a problem?  Does the fact that Amazon is both ISP and hardware  
provider make the situation better or worse?  At some level a  
specialized device won't substitute for "standard" Net access and one  
wouldn't complain about limitations, any more than one complains that  
standard cable TV service doesn't allow Web surfing, even if the set  
top box can tune to a handful of specialized Web site front ends for  
"enhanced" content.  (In fact, some televisions themselves now do  
this, along with Blu-Ray disc players.)  On the other hand, it's  
clearly a platform convergent with everything else -- one could  
imagine bringing only a Kindle on a trip and managing web and  
primitive email access from it.

I think we'll be faced with more and more of these hybrid Internet  
appliances.  I'm worried about the end of the ethos of the mainstream  
hobbyist PC -- defined as the general public being able to define what  
code they want to run, without interference or undue shaping by  
gatekeepers -- and see appliances (and managed web services like the  
Facebook and Google apps platforms) as substitutes rather than  
complements.[4]

Best,
JZ

--

[1] - <http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00154JDAI>
[2] - <http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=200144530&#content 
>
[3] - <http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html/ref=kin2w_ddp?nodeId=200144530&#wireless 
>
[4] - <http://www.futureoftheinternet.org>

Jonathan Zittrain
Professor of Law
Harvard Law School | Harvard Kennedy School of Government
Co-Founder, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
<http://cyber.law.harvard.edu>




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com