IP: A counter to the lamenter -- The Risks in an Unregulated Internet

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

> Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000 08:52:02 -0500 (EST)
> From: Scott Bradner <sob () harvard edu>
> To: farber () cis upenn edu
> Subject: Re: IP: The Risks in an Unregulated Internet
>
> A counter to the lamenter (seems like the Internet is just too confusing
> to some people)
>
> Scott
>
> ---------
>
> title: The importance of being a dynamist.
>
> Three an a half years ago I tried to explain to one of the judges in the
> Communications Decency Act case that too much reliance on centrally
> mandated standards would hurt the Internet.  I was not as articulate as I
> would have liked to have been and was only able to say "What achieved
> success was the very chaos that the Internet is. The strength of the
> Internet is that chaos. It's the ability to have the forum to innovate."
> The recent book "The future and its Enemies" by Virginia Postrel does a lot
> better job than I did in explaining what I was trying to say.
>
> This is a wide ranging book, taking on everybody from Newt Gingrich to the
> unibomber.  In the words of the author "this book examines the clash
> between stasis and dynamism and explores those contrasting views." I now
> know that I fall into the dynamism camp and what I was trying to explain to
> the judge was some of the implications of following the stasis path.
>
> Historically the Internet has been an environment to experiment in.  There
> have been a few basic rules.  The most important are the standards for the
> Internet Protocol (IP) and the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). There
> are other important standards for promulgating routing information and the
> like but the real power of the Internet idea is that there are not mandated
> standards for what can run over the Net.  Anyone who adheres to the TCP/IP
> standards can create new applications and run them without getting anyone's
> permission.  No Internet service provider even has to know you are
> experimenting (or playing, that is also OK.)  This freedom produces
> unpredictable results.  New industries can be created almost overnight and
> existing industries severely impacted.  Look at the impact of MP3 on the
> recording industry for an example.
>
> The stasis camp wants to control these innovations, "shape technology" in
> the words of Gingrich.  A dynamist wants to let the market decide.  So far
> the Internet has been let follow the dynamism path - it was mostly ignored
> by the traditional telecommunications industry.  Being ignored was the best
> thing that could have happened.
>
> A friend of mine spent some time a couple of years ago explaining the
> Internet to people in state government.  He reported that the dominate
> theme of the reaction of the bureaucrats was "How do we stop or control
> this thing?"  Lucky for innovation they were not paying attention when they
> could have had a serious impact.
>
> But the threat is not over.  The stasists fear the complexity and
> unpredictability that the Internet is bringing to the economy and to
> society.  They will continue to try to find ways to control its impact. As
> a dynamist I will keep trying to find ways around their fears.