Comments on: Jamming the Pearl https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423 2002-2015 Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:03:42 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.7.2 By: nicole https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22394 Sun, 06 Jan 2008 17:03:42 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22394 @Tom Corporations and free speech is like oil and water this really true!

Finally another hint at moving in the right direction by negotiating a free trade agreement with the USA. After all, we’re not a member of the EU for reasons. One of them being Freihandelsneutralität – a new chapter in the concept of “Staatsidee Schweiz”.

]]>
By: Walmer https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22393 Mon, 03 Sep 2007 03:46:00 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22393 Poptones, I don’t understand your comparison of Net Neutrality and free trade. How is it considered free speech, to be able to buy stuff made by those in slave labor, under governments which don’t allow them to have free speech. Also if Green cars really were that bad, then there should be regulation. Sure the market should get rid of them fairly quickly, but in the meantime, deaths would be caused, not just for those who buy them, but for those who would get hurt by those driving them. Also, don’t relate those who don’t think corporations work in our best interest to conspiracy theorists.

]]>
By: Carla https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22392 Tue, 21 Aug 2007 05:19:24 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22392 You’ve goofed again, Larry.

Nothing to do with Net Neutrality – but because us bloggers are nice and kind, we’ll help you put the toys back in the pram. Nice to hear you were famous back in 2002.

]]>
By: Wire https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22391 Mon, 20 Aug 2007 12:10:04 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22391 If poptones and I lived on the same block, or even in the same town, and were discussing this issue face to face, we probably would have had a much more productive exchange.

]]>
By: HH https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22390 Sat, 18 Aug 2007 02:10:49 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22390 The Bush gang definitely pushed the evelope of abuse and avoidance of existing laws and regulations. But in many cases, courts decisions beat back their schemes, notably in the areas of environmental protection and due process for accused individuals. Many cases are still working their way through the courts and the Bush style of gangster government is now widely discredited. An imperfect set of laws beats anarchy and/or mob rule.

I agree that we cannot rely solely on the law to protect network neutrality, but abandoning the regulatory path is exactly what the most powerful media corporations would wish. This would allow them to rig Internet communications to favor those who can pay the most, and thus further concentrate power in the hands of the plutocracy.

]]>
By: poptones https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22389 Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:36:28 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22389 “Do conflicts outside the law get resolved by combat again? Or do the economically strong simply force their will upon the weak? …”

You mean like now? When existing laws are not enforced in order to protect the corporate interests of those modern day robber barons?

Again, I’ll point out your logic is entirely flawed. In a political climate where we are not even enforcing laws that already exist, what possible value will new laws have to anyone except those already being shielded from the existing laws?

]]>
By: HH https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22388 Fri, 17 Aug 2007 19:18:21 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22388 In 1933, the golden moment when regulation was just right, according to poptones, the US was in the grip of the Great Depression, a catastrophe brought on by insufficient regulation of the financial markets and the inadequacy of government intervention to restore economic growth. But leaving aside poptones nostalgia for the Depression era, consider that in 1933 there was no airline industry, no television, and no nuclear power. There was also widespread and systematic discrimination against black people. Had the legal and regulatory framework of the United States been frozen at that time, minorities would still be using segregated restrooms.

poptones has yet to confront the awkward question of what happens when the legal structure is frozen and technology continues to evolve. Do conflicts outside the law get resolved by combat again? Or do the economically strong simply force their will upon the weak? Perhaps the writings of Ayn Rand are not the best guide to management of a modern society.

Regarding Professor Lessig’s interest in improving the law, I believe the record speaks clearly in his favor. His heroic effort, in arguments before the Supreme Court, to check the expansion of copyright duration is but one example of his energetic advocacy of sound public policy in the United States.

]]>
By: poptones https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22387 Fri, 17 Aug 2007 03:37:01 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22387 If we exclude the moronic 18th amendment, then I’d say 1920. But thanks to the busybodies meddling in people’s personal lives, I’d have to say 1933…

And professor Lessig is a lawyer. A lawyer not lobbying for new and more laws would be like a wolf lobbying for fewer sheep.

]]>
By: HH https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22386 Fri, 17 Aug 2007 01:53:20 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22386 One wonders when the magical moment occurred when there were just enough laws. poptones seems to believe that each new law or regulation makes things worse. Unfortunately for this argument for stasis, new things continue to be invented. Professor Lessig has devoted an extraordinary amount of effort toward preventing industrial era property laws from being misapplied to the information age.

As the structures of society evolve, the laws and regulations governing those structures must also evolve. Before the advent of aviation, there was no need for the FAA and international protocols and conventions governing aircraft flights. The public Internet is a radically novel feature of modern society. It is entirely reasonable to expect new laws and regulations to emerge to keep its functions efficient and equitable.

]]>
By: poptones https://archives.lessig.org/?p=3423#comment-22385 Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:36:10 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2007/08/jamming_the_pearl.html#comment-22385 ROTFL. Another great example to prove my argument…

This stuff is already illegal. We know it’s illegal because the news agencies are telling us it is and because the administration is defending it while refusing to verify they’re even doing it – exactly the pattern they’ve used the last 6 years as they whittle away at our rights.

So yes… I’m sure “net neutrality” legislation would have prevented any such happenings. Because more laws that contain more loopholes to protect those in power is a way better defense against tyrants than simply enforcing existing laws that already defend us against such erosions of our liberties. Isn’t that what our patriots told us? More laws = freedom; fewer laws = tyranny.

Yes, I’m sure that’s exactly the formula…

]]>