Also, does anyone expect an increase in censorship of the web if/when Rockefeller’s bill for granting the president the authority to shut down the internet for “security” concerns. That reason could be used for almost any reason to close the internet. I am interested in hearing your comments on this one.

In turn, their Chinese competitors bring increased competition to both Google and Facebook, creating incentives for them to improve their own products and continue to innovate. This example closely resembles capitalist Americans emulating European technology in the 19th century or Japanese entrepreneurs emulating Western technology during the process of their development.”

I take issue with this observations.

The Chinese blatantly copy everything churned out by Western innovators – right down to the naming itself (e.g. “Baidu” is actually derived from Google).

And as if the language barrier wasn’t enough for Western developers to penetrate the huge Chinese market, the Chinese government also severely limits – even downright banning – Western developers from having a Chinese presence. So domestic companies are sheltered by government and have come to dominate the domestic market in China. This gives them a gigantic war chest to compete with Western developers – so it’s a titled playing-field.

Michael wrote: “This wouldn’t be the same Internet developed by the US government (under the name ARPANET), would it? (…) I expect the writer’s next article to trumpet the free market’s creation of the GPS.”

The comment: No doubt both the Internet and the GPS were developed in military contexts (the first one in many ways allegedly ‘thanks’ to the Soviet Sputnik launch). But the point is (1) that probably only in the environment of a largely free market economy could both of them be developed and continually improved, and, above all, (2) only in such competitive environment could both be made accessible, useful and user-friendly to practically everybody outside the military sphere. Had Internet and the GPS been developed in the former Soviet Union, there is not the slightest doubt that both would have been considered top military secrets, and barred from the public use to the very end of the Soviet empire.

In this perspective, the GPS in my car is indeed a free market creation.

This wouldn’t be the same Internet developed by the US government (under the name ARPANET), would it? Naah–clearly no connection.

I expect the writer’s next article to trumpet the free market’s creation of the GPS.

Obviously hasn’t visited 4chan recently…

1. David Clark: “We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code”.

What’s the dominant view? That’s rough consensus.

2. Jon Postel: “Be conservative in what you send and liberal in what you accept”.

I believe it is good to remember this especially when dealing with trolls also in accepting that in some parts of the Internet or when sending email to a boss, a colleague or even an Instant Message.

RTRebel says “…which makes the statists go crazy “

That’s redundant!

Not to mention, it implies a cause and effect that is the exact opposite of my own observations.

They think its a problem, but I think people naturally move toward bastions of freedom and so I cheer that trend. It proves these bastions of freedom are more valuable than any (relatively) more command-control areas of life, which makes the statists go crazy (and that also makes me smile)

This has little or nothing to do with copyright law. Trademark law is probably what you’re thinking of.

Cheers

Actually, some ISP’s still perform deep packet inspection, and throttle some content.

Cell phone application space is anything but open.

Now we will see what the government does. We know it loves our data. It’s sucking up everything that we do.

There is a natural protection of copyrights built right into the Internet. Two entities cannot have google.com It can only be physically routed to one.