[ NNSquad ] Two more posts on open internet rules

["David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>]

Barbara van Schewick wrote a great post at http://netarchitecture.org/2010/12/the-fccs-open-internet-proposal-lessons-from-silicon-valley/

and I just responded, hopefully reinforcing her message at http://www.reed.com/blog-dpr/?p=85

Hers begins:

Since I posted the letter by Zediva, an online video company, that describes what the current Open Internet proposal would mean for them and how the proposal should be improved to protect them and other innovators, many have asked me about the broader lessons from Zediva’s story. Others have asked for a bit more detail about the proposed improvements to the rules.

Mine begins:

A response to Barbara van Schewick: code needs (only a little) help from the law

Barbara van Schewick posted a really thoughtful analysis about how about application-specific vs. application-agnostic discrimination directly affects innovation, and looks at an actual example of a Silicon Valley startup. I think her points are right on, and I strongly support the rationale for resisting “application-specific” discrimination.

In fact, Barbara’s point is the key to the whole debate. The future of the internet requires that applications be able to be invented by anyone and made available to everyone, and information shared on the net by anyone to be accessible to anyone. That property is “under fire” today by Internet access providers, by nation states, and by others who wish to limit the Internet’s reach and capabilities. I wholeheartedly support her points and her proposal.