Net Neutrality and Free Speech

Video thumbnail (Frame 0) Video thumbnail (Frame 3854) Video thumbnail (Frame 9594) Video thumbnail (Frame 11081) Video thumbnail (Frame 15901) Video thumbnail (Frame 17201) Video thumbnail (Frame 19326) Video thumbnail (Frame 21186) Video thumbnail (Frame 22689) Video thumbnail (Frame 26188) Video thumbnail (Frame 28553) Video thumbnail (Frame 30069) Video thumbnail (Frame 32338) Video thumbnail (Frame 33851) Video thumbnail (Frame 38096) Video thumbnail (Frame 39523) Video thumbnail (Frame 42914) Video thumbnail (Frame 47129) Video thumbnail (Frame 51513) Video thumbnail (Frame 58261) Video thumbnail (Frame 59498) Video thumbnail (Frame 73121) Video thumbnail (Frame 86744)
Video in TIB AV-Portal: Net Neutrality and Free Speech

Formal Metadata

Net Neutrality and Free Speech
Title of Series
Part Number
Number of Parts
CC Attribution - ShareAlike 3.0 Germany:
You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor and the work or content is shared also in adapted form only under the conditions of this license.
Release Date

Content Metadata

Subject Area
When most people think free speech, they think of government censorship. But in fact the architecture of speech can be much more important. In my talk I examine the history of private censorship and the question of Net Neutrality as a speech doctrine for the 21st century.
Metropolitan area network Slide rule Finitismus Greatest element Link (knot theory) Divisor State of matter Weight Weight Multiplication sign Prisoner's dilemma Electronic mailing list Data mining Goodness of fit Computer animation Videoconferencing Website Cuboid Circle Office suite
Axiom of choice Focus (optics) Confidence interval Multiplication sign Decision theory Software developer Weight Content (media) Digital object identifier Open set Mereology Complete metric space Sphere Order (biology) Word Integrated development environment Order (biology) Charge carrier Speech synthesis Ideal (ethics) Local ring
Axiom of choice Point (geometry) Game controller Functional (mathematics) Mereology Different (Kate Ryan album) Internetworking Videoconferencing Energy level Diagram Information Extension (kinesiology) Area Information Forcing (mathematics) Physical law Type theory Computer animation Software Integrated development environment Telecommunication Blog Video game Normal (geometry) Quicksort Fiber bundle Pressure Communications protocol
Axiom of choice Multiplication sign Interface (computing) Software developer Expression Keyboard shortcut Surface of revolution Neuroinformatik Tablet computer Digital photography Personal computer Process (computing) Computer animation Computer science Computing platform
Axiom of choice Centralizer and normalizer Process (computing) Information Link (knot theory) Bit Mereology Power (physics) Neuroinformatik
Classical physics Game controller Computer animation Information Speech synthesis Figurate number Mereology Metropolitan area network
Information Lecture/Conference Annihilator (ring theory) Local ring Gradient descent
Mathematics Lecture/Conference Speech synthesis Self-organization Figurate number Local ring Power (physics)
Point (geometry) Code Image resolution Sound effect Mereology Sphere Flow separation Rule of inference SCSI Field (computer science) Gaussian elimination Lecture/Conference Hypermedia Uniformer Raum Interpreter (computing) Video game Quicksort Exception handling
Standard deviation Standard deviation Key (cryptography) Cone penetration test Code Source code Code Rule of inference Number Computer animation Natural number Video game Office suite Physical system
Group action Computer animation Code Sheaf (mathematics) Similarity (geometry) Rule of inference Wave packet
Game controller Key (cryptography) Code Concentric INTEGRAL Code Sound effect 19 (number) Wave packet Frequency Universal product code Lecture/Conference Internetworking Order (biology) Data structure Error message YouTube Row (database) Physical system
Metropolitan area network Computer animation Lecture/Conference Term (mathematics) Authorization Code Normal (geometry) Right angle Metropolitan area network Element (mathematics)
Point (geometry) Metropolitan area network Concentric Multiplication sign Content (media) Planning Open set Mereology Power (physics) 10 (number) Frequency Computer animation Lecture/Conference Internetworking Hypermedia Ideal (ethics) Physical system
Point (geometry) Axiom of choice Group action Code INTEGRAL Direction (geometry) 1 (number) Open set Mereology Rule of inference Power (physics) Internetworking Bridging (networking) Videoconferencing Operating system Position operator Metropolitan area network Exception handling Area Scaling (geometry) Executive information system Weight Content (media) Mathematical analysis Bit Word Computer animation Software Search engine (computing) Telecommunication Charge carrier Speech synthesis Normal (geometry) Website Quicksort Pressure
Axiom of choice Point (geometry) Beta function Link (knot theory) View (database) Decision theory Open set Rule of inference Neuroinformatik Internetworking Energy level Form (programming) Exception handling Regulator gene Block (periodic table) Physical law Bit Degree (graph theory) Logic Speech synthesis Normal (geometry) Codec Right angle Quicksort Pressure Fundamental theorem of algebra
Group action Multiplication sign View (database) Decision theory Workstation <Musikinstrument> Mereology Mathematics Bit rate Computer configuration Different (Kate Ryan album) Extension (kinesiology) Position operator Predictability Regulator gene Stress (mechanics) Sound effect Parallel port Bit Surface of revolution 10 (number) Data management Exterior algebra Ring (mathematics) Telecommunication Normal (geometry) Right angle Species Freeware Boiling point Reading (process) Annihilator (ring theory) Point (geometry) Service (economics) Divisor Link (knot theory) Letterpress printing Rule of inference Power (physics) Latent heat Goodness of fit Root Internetworking Term (mathematics) Natural number Operator (mathematics) Energy level Software testing Utility software Form (programming) Domain name Multiplication Information Weight Expert system Content (media) Mathematical analysis Basis <Mathematik> Ripping Word Computer animation Software Personal digital assistant Charge carrier Speech synthesis
Axiom of choice Group action Context awareness Dynamical system State of matter Multiplication sign Set (mathematics) Data transmission Optical disc drive Different (Kate Ryan album) Extension (kinesiology) Physical system Area Algorithm Moment (mathematics) Sound effect Bit Flow separation Electronic signature Type theory Arithmetic mean Googol Addressing mode Search algorithm Order (biology) Normal (geometry) Right angle Quicksort Point (geometry) Existence Game controller Service (economics) Connectivity (graph theory) Real number Control flow Dichotomy Rule of inference Power (physics) Product (business) Hypothesis Number Revision control Centralizer and normalizer Goodness of fit Natural number Internetworking Authorization Energy level Information Physical law Line (geometry) Human migration Computer animation Integrated development environment Software Logic Charge carrier Window
devaluing a look at buying team of mine was frightened of it won't overdo things few to formal and
so forth and and zooming in this link from would you won't at the to work with that never exciting that's gene is designed to people move among those will be more all from like India are in enforced prison it's a circle Moncton earliest office under Columbia law school 0 course obviously playing of the moon ordained as chairman beating the foam over that's the 1 free press the the because the near-term and but come the but I'm interested in good and probably is random will he's been officer under Columbia University in New York usual Y 5 dataset would we it's been several that he's not in command of the million this video unseen boys who creative stay high by hiding devoted nearly in this side of this divide this to get quite quite inflow idea in coins when could tell New of Citibank . 7 months he said other in and given the latent hinted billions of weighted that each given at the time the on my own slide hides that might help design fast In onto a site is investments mind please by since you obviously go you of state endemic the dating and shattered discussion on the 5 problem it then box at the bottom of the list of health and under the of in developmental that's high so that the latent clustering to name In commit commit halftones divide the net neutrality of lake and nobody minds my name's finite since you've got it that's why I English
it came out is that the sinuses the role that they didn't take the time to live in 1 you have soy de Mesina which market that is in does you can that you the confidence stand out in that's the is the the the the Doi Tung and Norman devil often height nietzsche the shaft and so on until the individually to we might
not be the best which will be in English the is comprised of 4 parts I have an interest in that neutrality since 2003 or so when we have started the colonies neutrality but as time has passed have become increasingly interested it not just the economic aspects but the social political and more than anything the freedom based aspects of why we demand an open non discriminatory environment from carriers so today and the talk about the question of why we want the underlying freedom and also why it matters to the other choose the content you read or the tools that you use how that informs who we become aware what we are and then the focus very carefully on this question of public versus private censorship it is my belief that we particularly in the West are familiar with the problem of public censorship but that we've only started to understand the problem private censorship recently we only started understand that the most decision important speech decisions today but are being made by private entities rather than public but began with this question of why was seeking freedom why it matters what the underlying foundation of net neutrality issue are is start with that local character German professor Hagel from the University of Berlin and here's why Hagel said said in German originally a person must give to his freedom and external sphere in order that he reads the completeness implied in the idea the idea or the sentiments 10 these words is that the importance of freedom of speech or freedom of development is the opportunity to develop into a full person the opportunity through the external sphere to make choices that might make you who you become now Higgle the the only
person said this this is John Stuart Mill in his and his wife both of whom were wrote the book area and Taylor who wrote the book On Liberty to and if you read this book again maybe this is almost a Bible libertarians if you read this book again you find very carefully this idea that the reason we want freedom is not just a can choose 1 Nellcor different type of cheeses but that career choices you can potentially become the person you were meant to be that you can develop your character that you can find a deeper sense of individuality as not just an idea
we talk about these ideas I think we have to understand that an idea that so 2010 or in the 21st century is that neutrality the idea of this freedom of choice of information has its foundations in much older ideas is ideas from from writers like loud but in Indian writers tend the theory of many of these things are focused on this goal of self-development self-actualization pursuant through freedom freedom from all forces not simply laws but freedom from norms freedom from internal pressures from everything these are lead to this question of who you are and you know we think and i it's easy to sort of trivializes the role the bloggers or other Internet people play but at a deeper level of what the blood when the internet has made possible what today's communications mediums have made possible is is that have more control over what information you're exposed to and what tools you use and it comes down to this question this video Leonidas's Jolion notion of trying to figure out at the point of life itself is to figure out just to you are now let me explain how this relates to today's communications networks part of who we are of course is not really within our control genetic not something you can modify with a protocol at least not yet but the other aspects are things that are very carefully with the controls the most powerful aspect I think 0 2 1st the information that we received coming toward us how we interpret it whatever information environment looks like this is obviously something that's going to change a lot depending on what kind of informational choices you make you can expose yourself information that makes you angry the mission happy makes you sad those whatever but the fact is led to an extent unprecedented in human history we shows what sort of information is analyzed the 2nd is the aspect of what tools we the 2nd fundamental aspect is the role that tools planner alive but what humans do what they become who you are you can understand very deeply as a function of the tools you used your daily life was once axes isn't that diagram it could be a writer
you could be a photographer you be a soldier more than anything it's a tool in the choice of tools that plays a crucial role in this expression the abstract free will In the process of self actualization self-development a lot times and this is why so important to be aware that the computer and an the wireless phone and and some of these tablets things like this these are our tools of our time these are defining who we are the freedoms we have on these platforms are not just important 2 D exerted at all but they define exactly
what we will be what we will become in an individual sense and social sense so here's the Douglas Englebart 1st interface is a computer scientist and 19 sixties not completely sure what happened the thing on the left with the vacancy the mouse so much that it might differ from really sure that if they see their the 1st mouse the 1st keyboard 1st conceived of a 1950 1st about the 1968 this is the tool revolution that we've all lived with the development of a personal computer the
move of power of information processing away from centralized entities and towards the individual this part of the nite the movement of 19 seventies war against centralized power against to weight against monopoly towards power and individual towards the the notion of small is beautiful the computer idea logically is deadly link to these these ideas of freedom and and personal choice and
today same fellow a little bit older still design tools the defining who we are now want to talk about the issue
of censorship to the idea the control of information to I think we are but everyone knows that censorship is everyone is familiar with with that the classic examples of censorship and that the general idea that censorship is bad in America censorship is closely associated with this man George the 3rd the king the reaction to his control over what Americans could receives information was part of the reason behind the 1st Amendment but the idea of censorship as much much longer history obviously and is really fundamental and in the course of human freedom to
think it a way back to the beginning if you think of the poisoning of Socrates what was Socrates punished for speech no 1 really like Socrates because it had a lot around Barcelona questions the read the Socratic dialogs in realizing less than kind annoying figure but anyway the great tragedy of antiquity to the great tragedy antiquity the 2nd into it is is it is an issue of censorship is he said things that were unpopular and therefore was put to death by self-poisoning the other great example
censorship the original example for Christians it is a punishment of descent Paris within the jewish faith by the crucifixion of Jesus Christ Jesus and it goes on we're are familiar with the
censorship of information the the Reformation the idea of descent from a received doctrine but by another German Martin Luther suppressed intensely by probably all 10th to excommunicated Martin Luther and finally the mother local example so I said
that that way but the would you have example of a censorship in the 2nd World War these are all examples
of private-public public censorship which I suggest dominant way of thinking about this problem but the truth is that we have seen major change the In the way power is allocated in society In the last century the last thousands of years the re the powerful entities of matter and were almost always emperors King local war lords In short public figures boys of saint coming mostly from the United States is arrives on private power as can equal public power and with that we get this we began to see their eyes of private gatekeepers was power over speech rivals that of the most powerful public actors in history so what I'm going to do it and then and the final thing we've seen is not only have we seen private power grow but we live in an age where in the western world where in the world but private corporations that's speeches privately controlled but the most important speech organizations are private entities and so I will
talk about the history of American film censorship was particularly interesting about the history of American film censorship are several things 1st of all it's not a very well known history unless unless you happen to be a historian it's not not known the way In a stories Socrates started Jesus stories allele at have what's also interesting it is possibly with some exceptions the mouse intensive and effective part or history for example of censorship in the history of United States this many years the Lord he is a jesuit priest and he devoted his life to the elimination of field in the public sphere particularly in the cinema then a lot of the very simple but very clear idea but the point of all media should be to reinforce received truth and never challenges in his conception of the truth was known with player and not the reinforcer never challenged and then a lot was an interesting essayist he was the important thing here
but is it Porter in particular because they see who wrote the censorship code for American film to in the 19 twenties he wrote this code code to govern the make an emotional talking pictures the reasons supporting it and the resolution for uniform interpretation some of you may have heard of this the sort of well known as a rule that was the book that required people that couples to sleep in separate beds let's take a look at this here is
that the absolute center of this code there's 3 principles that were the key to this system of film censorship United States number 1 no picture shall be produced that will all the moral standards of those who see it hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime wrongdoing evil person the
2nd principle was the correct standards of life subject only to the requirement of drama entertainment shall be presented 3rd loss natural human shall not be ridiculed nor set sympathy be created Ford's violation so what was interesting about the censorship rules 1 thing is may be heard of the idea of the Hollywood ending so these are the rules of suggested that how you see Hollywood movies they have to have a happy ending here's a source of that kind of idea moreover when you look carefully the rules as suggested for example that you could Abbott corrupt police officer but the police system could never be corrupt you could have a corrupt judge but the legal system had to be proven in the end the righteous you have a single must be increased but the and the Catholic Church could never be directly question and if you watch carefully films that America we'll see how often especially mainstream film particularly in under the age the code these values there reinforce and subtle and not subtle ways the cone not only to say that was not only the general will also versus civic ideas for example
got a very particular reasons for dancing rules for dancing similarly you might see in in a similar to kind rule the Americans criticized in other countries as American the 19 thirties dances suggesting a representing sexual actions on these passions are forbidden edges which emphasizes indecent movements are regarded as obscene the an obscene things and this
is an actor's name a West some you may know her whose belongs to the code essentially ended the career choose a similar character Samantha on them section the city she's the 1 who said is that a gunnery happy to see me this is a famous like anyway she could no longer make films after the introduction of the enforcement the code 1934 the mother segment from the code train the
racial side of it there's never been a trial the black and white people having sex and it goes on and goes on so you might wonder well OK it's 1 thing for
Daniel Lord have his code but how exactly was this enforced was a something people would just ignore or is it something well the 1st row of the twenties wasn't paid much attention to but eventually and the keys here is to understand but more than anything was
industry structure that made possible what was America's most effective censorship system in 1950 interests in 1915 there were over 11 thousand films made United States this was a predecessor to the YouTube error there are nearly a thousand there was nearly 11 films of I'm not mistaken made every day United States is extremely vibrant period now you know they were necessarily all films some the more like YouTube videos people jump around bowling trains would always best movies but there was a lot of movies covering every topic what happened the American film industry and that's a lesson for the internet was there was an enormous concentration integration of all the industries until there are really only 4 there's only for your but 5 major studios fully integrated with controlled everything and this is what made possible by the production code this is what made possible censorship Industrial integration Daniel Lord in nineteen thirty-four after the last May Western calls for Catholic boycotts of all motion pictures no Catholic was going to stay in good standing with the church Western attend a film the suggested and this this is the way the industry reacted the threat of a boycott and so because you had only 4 5 studios a total of of 5 integrated studios there was only 5 people you needed to get control of In order to enforce a censorship regime over American film and after that it was simple no film that was not preapproved
by the motion picture authority was allowed to play there's an interesting history Europe Warner Brothers for example element say 1 thing the man who is in charge and forcing it
always itself just bring in a private letter on the right to his friends I am the 1 man who can cram these and ethics down the 1st the Jews so size role in enforcing the norms of the Catholic and Protestant majority over Jewish filmmakers who control most of the studios in Hollywood the size role in very explicit terms and making sure the majority's ethics were used to control the minority this is just a
brain so it's interesting as a point of history is for example Warner Brothers concerned about concentration camps in Germany in the 1930's began doing a film or or plan to do a film exposing the concentration early concentration camps doesn't green refused permission have the film made and so was never made In this system every single film was
remade it was to be submitted for pre-approval and this is the
little room where they would read a script and decide whether or not can be made watching the sentiments of 1 now the reason I discussed this example which is I think 1 more powerful examples of private censorship in American history not the only example is suggests that holds extremely important lessons fervor R times on the internet there have been over the course of history many new media with which arise are invented go through a flourishing where a time where the thousands of voices hundreds of outlets where seems impossible to imagine it could ever be a controlled a censored regimes people thought that way about film the 19 tens and they felt that way about radio on American the 19 twenties they felt that way about the telephone than that in the 19 tens turn-of-the-century every single media goes through its period of openness of idealism of unrestrained content but it is the rise of private powers or sometimes public power they can spell the end of that era and is against that that you must always be vigilant and is thus particular danger then I think that neutrality is reacting to planning to come to the part of the talk why discussed
network neutrality norms what I wanna suggest to you is the 1 that neutrality that you probably the herds of the debate on both sides should networks be less discriminatory should never to be non-discriminatory there's some . net neutrality where reasonable people can disagree the questions of speeding up in a particular types of content whether you should allow adjustments for video a or for voiced there's a data these are points which reasonable minds we disagree but there isn't much deeper side and neutrality and that's words understood as a general principle of freedom a general principle of openness extended into the modern age at the quarter and the net neutrality principles is the old idea of non-discrimination the old idea the English idea of common carriers which you find in taxis which you find on various which you find on bridges which you find on every crucial infrastructure In most civilized country the idea that if you are an essential part of the economy this crucial that part of the economy operate without discrimination and what I'm suggesting the day is not simply for economic reasons innovation reasons which and I don't the buyer important but what we're dealing with speech and so it is rules like net neutrality rules and we can see this already happening in America and then a child is becoming as important a free speech as the 1st Amendment the open Internet issues of meaning commonly found even call we want but the rules that control private speech gatekeepers are becoming the speech code of America and may eventually become the speech rules for the world what are these rules looking like well as a you know last legislation now this is what I wanna say we also live I wanna suggest an American particular In America
competition is the exception monopoly is the rules we lived in 20 years of robust competition but true this from most American Communications history has been controlled by monopolies I would not be surprised if we see the re-emergence and the Wobblies monopolies in every American communications industry over the next 10 years there is every reason suggest the advantages of economies of scale the desire for power but the man who run powerful companies the advantages of an integrated business America's monopolies in the operating system business monopolies in the search engine business I would not be surprised we see a re-emergence of monopoly in most areas of communication businesses well Internet the comprised of a monopoly the least Comcast 18 the rise in large companies and that's why these rules become so important because when you have that some kind of market power the temptations proprietor censorship becomes intense and what I want to point out again using the example of the Catholic Church it's not these people you have to be worried about they don't care these companies generally are interested in making money which is reasonable for a company what you need to be worried about by the entities some care about speech on a position to control these characters what we learned in the 19 thirties wasn't at the studios 1 of the sensors and that is 1 of the make films but if parties who care who want to censor who were able to intimidate concentrated powers they're the ones you need to be careful about and so on are age the question is for example where the government might be able to as they already did say analysis would need to know a little bit about some Americans we need the of Internet traffic and and take a look at it where the government or whether church groups or other groups say you know what we need to have certain what websites blocked all over the United States because a dangerous to children are dangerous to you received wisdom it is again not the carriers who matter but the people were able to put pressure on the carriers but is only 2 or 3 choices it's very easy to swing everything towards 1 direction so what are the rules that have sort of come out well they're not very complicated I mean there's a
lot of complicated ways of presenting it but as I seen at most of it is boiled down to 3 essential points and here we're not talking at the level of longer were docking at the level of norms fx rules for society shown block no shall not discriminate unfairly and thou shalt that uses use the tools of their choice these are principles which are not hard understand but only 3 of them and I wanna suggest they have to some degree already become the governing the fellows of companies that do business on the internet a company like Comcast American cable company 2 years ago began blocking the charge they never said exactly had a right to block the they don't say their right to do it they just said we would actually doing it in the human rights world sometimes you'll see that countries they don't see well with some exceptions don't say that torturers right they denied doing it and that's where I believe some of the norms of openness and got and that's what I believe is the most important thing laws and regulations come and go I don't deny the importance of a professor of law that and the thing is things matter a little bit but much more important as the underlying values subscribe to people and government of course but also by the industry itself the most important of all people like you the general public that the farms they don't really care about these issues in any kind of idea logical sense but they do care about public reaction to the things they do and so I think and I charge you as the public in Germany the whole every company to these rules there's reasonable debate around them as I said there's such a thing as reasonable discrimination fair discrimination it's like cholesterol there's good and bad forms but the very essence of the rules are extremely important because I predict that in the coming years the pressure to censor the Internet will become intense to this is a quote from John Stuart Mill a lot I remind you again come back to the beginning and say why I think these rules are important I think there are important because they're fundamentally rules about choices rules that are designed to let people to do it again to cultivate their own personality and their own individuality as I said earlier defined as in some sense who they are and that requires that the ability to be exposed to points of view to choose a among them to choose a tools you use that freedom while they seem kind of you know someone has fancy computer and so forth may seem safe but in very subtle ways in be eroded and not just by laws technical decisions but just by the disapproval the sort of society we live in and so when that challenge to my mind is linked to despite its modern name it's a link to the Internet and betas is is fundamental questions of freedom and self actualization self-development prima speech to
that's all I have and so I be pleases now take any questions anyone might have thank you very much but if you yeah things
so you set your 2nd rule of low shine not discriminate unfairly now but then actually the whole debate posts onto who decides what is fair and under which criteria and so on so which is a bit more on that yes it is a good point when I was writing that I was like someone's gonna ask me that was a fair question what is unfairly and I thought well or what
decides what's there what's what's unfair the reason for that word in marriage because the no I'm not absolutists about discrimination of being in the carriage information it's it's some impossible position to to to take you should never anyone who runs the network understands this management decisions and and and so forth as I've understood it I don't know of a better alternative I guess I guess to 2 2 ideas the idea I favor and 1 that began i in the Comcast hearings that United States to the idea was to see if you can see the weight of Internet expert opinion make this the session so when when Kevin Martin decided the chair of the FCC of the time the American regulators was trying to figure out whether Comcast was being reasonable this action observatory called David reading called the clock to columns of the Internet and called other people said you know do you think this is a reasonable way of doing business and their opinion was that it was not because it was done secretly because a lot about what they were doing and because it was a unilateral action but and so I think if you take testimony from people more serious about networks you can discover relatively easily whether discrimination in question is done in good faith but didn't notice a whether it's something designed in a short term advantage or even most layer clearly either sensor on the basis of content or try to gain a business advantage to but that's roughly how I think it should be done but in other words I think fairly is on the weight experts in it it the you brought up and I was very pleased to hear it the parallel to what we call in the US common carrier of wall but that hasn't gotten much traction in the net neutrality debate and that 1 should be offered the opportunity or indeed that I he should become hello in the way that an airline or a bus company years if they want a license to transport people they can only be licensed if they agreed operate as a common carrier but but there is even an option to get service from an I S P that agrees to operate as a common carrier of facts right sure carry here that offers Internet access the required to offer as an option a service that operates as a common carrier of packets the and should they going further the licensed only if they operate as a common carrier patents analysis of a questionnaire straightforwardly I I I don't think at a fundamental level there's any real difference between the conception of the neutrality common carrier I think they are basically the same idea but any notes many child is a nice ring to it so the common carriers actually the difference is the common carriage it's going to be a little common regulatory complex becoming carried began to go on a lot of baggage and began associated with them the very intrusive regulation of prices put government specification of of network I get very complicated intrusive regime but that's not essential to the needs and and monopoly premise it's not essential for the nature of common carriage my mind if you look at the roots of common carriage the going back to 15th century very simple principle it just simply says to you must serve every customer becomes to you much charge on the same prices deliver the same services and poster rates and not charge unreasonable rates my view of so maybe beyond scope of this topic of my view of communications regulations the only need 1 rule that's really a non-discrimination rule and that is the exact part of common carriers so yes there is a lot of baggage attached commentary to this point so it's needed this is in in washing words it's difficult to talk about but the truth is when you boil it down you go back to the ancient principles people look you don't give it a biblical example of the whole idea of the innkeeper being common carrier is pretty obvious that idea came from of this from the the problem of people showing up in the middle the nite no place to go have been denied service because they're a certain race or or just link híbridos like them and so have sustained stable somewhere the this this idea that private actors have an enormous amount of power over you when they offer an essential services common carriers and the Internet is very obviously are common medium today you know it seems so clear that I was an altar of everyone here would be used to this conference and cut off the internet to people here you probably die after a week my prediction I don't know your that well but I would predict that so it's very clear that it's it's like lectures something that its utility of our time so it is there's no question really when you get down to it but the in and in Washington this is a loaded word which is why it's been avoided if the it has so you mentioned that we shouldn't worry all that much about the change in rise in income test these wanna make money yeah sure about that the words of day but when you put up the picture of it but we want to issues of whether a Marvin more I was a lawyer for free press and I was involved in the contest cases rather Comcast cases everyone wants to be a good idea but with without but and with the sugar picture of you of George the 3rd that reminded me of the Stamp Act in in the US helped lead the revolution with the King George raise the taxes on prints for newspapers for legal documents and essentially tax on knowledge in speech and raising the costs of the tools of communication also as a user factor and you can speak to him in how through and so to the extent that the phone and cable companies are raising the prices of people being able to speak and maybe in discriminatory ways that still has an effect on species I think you you overlooked when you said should worry too much about yeah that's true the other the price of speech to determines how much of the various you know what I was saying the 19 tens it was very easy to make a movie this thousands of movies made all kinds of topics 19 twenties histories of the radio stations of domain radio stations its data over radio station or make a movie is a multi million dollar operation this allows people speak so get points exactly right I guess what I was trying to suggest is that and I'll repeat it isn't we talk about the the worst forms of censorship the most dangerous forms they're often not from commercial entities but again from people but interesting controlling speech and commercial entities have known you of some reasons to resist but they may not be adequate safeguards we even Google which is the most it among them come user considers itself committed to freeze the speech norms nonetheless is going on in China for a while then subjected itself to to the Chinese Chinese speech coder but by and stuff from from the internet uh and I'd like to elaborate a little bit more on of Mormons question as I think that it's not only about 2 of censorship and we shouldn't be on the afraid about governmental whatever was controlling these fees but because the eyes fees themselves also have incentives altered sends all this is triple cried rubric very rare they are of discriminating their own content and this is
also censorship and we should be afraid of those guys as well you know but that's a good and 1 of I think it's a good point of my mind when you see the most particularized dangers so when you see it this is the the real problem vertical integration sorry here are the main that the greatest interest and censorship come when you have a competing products and so on and company I view is is fundamentally no but I have a new book coming out of and it's called the master switch In the thesis of that book basically that this is a long way answer question number 1 is that we seen all these problems before we will always be the same problems number to the greatest dangers come when you have the same people controlling the transmit transit transmission context we need a wall line separation principle the separator transmission from content almost like a separation of church and state and so I think the dangers but of private censorship from the big companies themselves come most particularly when they become interested in content themselves and this is a dangerous something like that in America that Comcast NBC merger you have a problem but extremely powerful 1 of America's most powerful movers information only some of America's most important information the conflict of interest is obvious the I think if you talk wants to ask about these strange dichotomy between the fact that the Internet is at the label network that's kind uncontrollable whereas creative freedom is primarily determined by national sovereignty the within a country the within the European Union account when implemented silicon we built century that impacts craters creative freedom he G so that's a kind of strange that could take as we've got people use greater freedom is unlimited to said extent on the internet and then you got the national law which will say we have the data set hardly get I see that the ITER international windows of an overriding national low but passes through the senses that thing gets a bit odd that's interesting question is kind of the subject the 1st book who control the Internet of I think the truth is that some that countries have will take different approaches to these problems they maintain their their national authority is as you suggested and that's why what matters more than anything else is the existence of norms in these areas they were having this discussion here here we in Germany by Monday neutrality which you know 5 years ago was where the known heard of phrase order of yesterday not 2 days ago was in Paris talking about the same issue text and so you know we could talk about open Internet of adjectival whatever the point is the most in a more important really international law but is international norms the spread of a certain set of ethics you know like these 3 principles I talked about if they are seen as the new sort of the right of accepted principles and that can sometimes affect or coordinate the way different nations deal with the same problems but not a full and talking more if you like if we have time for 1 or 2 more questions to but on some migration is so about the unlike like the dynamics of that book neutrality can bring to creative freedom and so is 1 dynamic against pretty freedom and fairness in the world that the use of sounds achieved that he's easier of integrated in this functionalized natural to of ideas peas and especially when the market place this is considered itself just monopolies but in so that the solution is that of centrality as a room but my question is on called of the rules can I have an effect on not only the don't don't Iose fees but also on services because don't um the control can come from natural rights but also from services on the network right so should be use this with the treaty in all 4 that all do we have to go beyond you know usually I think that's that's a that's a good question and typically we talked about that a child is being important for firms carriers will move information there but they have the most potential powers we have services which have reached a level of infrastructure a friends at Google most important examples and I can tell you that the moment Google against discriminated searches a moment I think Google the and I the Google the answer for example needs the answer for that essentially would be regulated the so I agree there are services that can reach the same kind of essential nature the carriers can so it's not a principle something that a little that components that's only centered on on never carriers and it's the same thing with tools I mean we when we see tools come out that maybe some latitude to have different types of tools but it's important that at some level and be available at least have open tools this final question the think about it I have 2 questions sexually offense first one is set to what in uh extend is net neutrality for you synonymous for entire censorship and the 2nd 1 is when you already brought up isn't net neutrality like this big delusions because already the search algorithm of Google does not allow signature trality completely you know we use it every day right gives us like a random like you said you shall not and discriminate fairly and the algorithm itself makes it discrimination right not necessarily like an involuntary 1 but it is not discrimination unless the point I mean I I said if I I don't think that a child is only about censorship I wanna say its deepest most fundamental foundation is as a guard against private censorship who has a lot of the 4 meanings of so important for economic and and and cultural reasons but at its very base the most important thing about it is the guard against censorship we can see this by saying that 1 country that absolutely rejects many child 1 nation the world that has no interest in neutrality whatsoever China to try to have and that the rule you could not support the system has it was interesting but China is that all of the censorship is done by private parties not by the government it is a system of private censorship which rivals or exceeds anything we've ever seen before but also that the suggestion of government as opposed to a bit so that that is the most important impact and that's is the best idea logical foundations which is what I was trying to build off of 2nd question is whether or not a company there will be some necessary discrimination they have good services I absolutely agree and that's why I said like cholesterol is good and bad discrimination you know a search has to make a choice when you type in mushroom or cheese or bicycle something has to be 1st the question is whether it's done in good natured good-faith Conaway away or whether it's done with a motive we must and the constantly on guard closely be aware but the motives behind those who giving us information that is what over their only chance of of of freedom is to understand again the motives of those who are creating in constructing our information environment but I think very much budget to that enzymes that his book kind
of interesting