The Observation Deck

Thought this topic deserved it's own thread as it does affect the future of the Internet.

Do we really want an Internet that is controlled in any way?
The big Telecoms say so.

What is it about the Internet makes it one of the greatest invention off all time?
Innovation.

The Internet is a place where every Tom, Dick and Harry can invent new and exciting things. In the case of protocols, I come from the school of thought that all protocols are created equal. When we start saying that one protocol (BitTorrent) should be blocked, shaped, throttled, etc. the only thing we are doing is hindering innovation. People are going to be less likely to come up with new ideas and new ways of doing things is they know there work is going to be curtailed at the whim of corrupt governments bowing down to arcane lobbying groups.

Take Care All.

The recent debacle with Comcast being outed as blatantly sabotaging BitTorrent traffic has blown the Net Neutrality discussion wide open.

David Lay wrote:The recent debacle with Comcast being outed as blatantly sabotaging BitTorrent traffic has blown the Net Neutrality discussion wide open.

That is sort of what I was getting at. Thanks for bringing it up. It is also mind-blowing how they can outright lie about it.


Click here to read more

Here's an even better link:

http://consumerist.com/search/comcast/

I think Net Neutrality is an extremely important topic. I'm hoping that Congress actually does something about it finally.

Bryan Schwegler wrote:I think Net Neutrality is an extremely important topic. I'm hoping that Congress actually does something about it finally.

I'm with you, Bryan. The Piratbyran, while located in Sweden, is doing a pretty good job of educating the public about the benefits of file sharing.

edit: I found this while on the Piratbyran's website...pretty good read:

http://www.piratbyran.org/index.php?vie ... les&id=107

Just some more info on a case that I think we all should be watching.

Click here to read the article

Not sure what you call this a brief maybe? Yes it is just one side of the story but it does make for a stellar read.

Click here to read the ...

Jim DeVito wrote:Just some more info on a case that I think we all should be watching.

Jim

You are right, this case should be on the front page of every paper and the lead story on TV. But we are so numb with abuses from this administration you barely rates a couple seconds.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/03/whistleblower_h.html

.

bittorrent was an innovative way to break copyright laws. On the other hand such distribution methods allow a few lucky musicians/artists/writers to garner enough fame to land big contracts with conventional physical medium heavyweights.

On the plus side we end up with good literature such as Achewood and Saga of the European King and Billy Dogma.

Last I checked Amazon.com still hasn't had an operation profit. But it has had a great impact on the social dynamics of literature. You don't meet folks at book stores so often, but you can argue with their reviews on Amazon.com.

The physical infrastructure of this information economy is immense and immensely expensive. Its gotta be paid for somehow. The development of it and its underlying technologies took about a trillion or so government dollars and several decades. I suspect the monthly ISP bills don't cover all of it.

ryan costa wrote:bittorrent was an innovative way to break copyright laws.

Untrue. The Bit Torrent Protocol was created to make it easer to share legit files. In fact it is being used for that purpose right now. I have a buddy at work who uses it share home movies with his family. Just because some people figured it could be used to share copyrighted material does not make it wrong or less deserving of the same protections afforded to other protocols. By that logic we should restrict the sales of DVD Burners because they can be used to make copies of copyrighted materials.

Jim DeVito wrote:

ryan costa wrote:bittorrent was an innovative way to break copyright laws.

Untrue. The Bit Torrent Protocol was created to make it easer to share legit files. In fact it is being used for that purpose right now. I have a buddy at work who uses it share home movies with his family. Just because some people figured it could be used to share copyrighted material does not make it wrong or less deserving of the same protections afforded to other protocols. By that logic we should restrict the sales of DVD Burners because they can be used to make copies of copyrighted materials.

The majority of the use of such software and technology is to share copyrighted materials. This should be implicitly understood by makers of such technology. And it probably is. That being said, big record companies should be suing the technology firms rather than a few users. I don't know whether they should succeed at those lawsuits. I just know there is no point in suing small fry users.

I am not so sure that makes sense. While I do agree there is no point to suing the small fry’s. I do not see what suing the tech firms does either. I get the point of going after the little guy to make a point. Problem is that is not going to make the intended point. You my get one or two but it is pretty well understood that they are never going to be able to get all the people doing this. Therefore people are not going to be swayed to the “right thingâ€Â

Looks like MediaDefender's attempted sabotage of The Pirate Bay cost 'em $800k:

http://tinyurl.com/2ypo7a

This is pretty unbelievable--- there was an FCC hearing about Net Neutrality in Harvard yesterday where we had a booth. Comcast was PAYING PEOPLE TO FILL UP SEATS AND CHEER FOR THEM. Tons of folks, including reporters, got turned away. For people that still have a hard time wrapping their heads around what net neutrality is, this about sums up what's happening.

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/02/26/re ... -paid.html