--------
**
While the nation’s AG’s are busy trying to
“eviscerate<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=59da064021&e=4742a9cece>”
one of the few provisions in law that was forward leaning and built for
innovation, innovators have their own laws: Moore’s
Law<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=c4583805d0&e=4742a9cece>
, Kryder’s
Law<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=83c16bc8ff&e=4742a9cece>,
and Nielsen’s
Law<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=bc4000da9e&e=4742a9cece>
.
Is this email not displaying correctly?
View it in your
browser<http://us6.campaign-archive2.com/?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=af308ddeba&e=4742a9cece>.
<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=e0a35a2549&e=4742a9cece>
Congress Could Throttle Tech Innovation With Two Measly Words
Hi Bruce Majors,
I wanted to sent you a new piece I wrote for Slate Magazine:
*Congress Could Throttle Tech Innovation With Two Measly Words*
Walking the streets in Palo Alto, Calif., it’s hard to imagine that the
rest of the United States is still crawling out of a recession. I suggest
we don’t tell the entrepreneurs here, most of whom are 19 to 27 years
old—one of the demographics most shaken by the economic downturn. What
accounts for this continued growth? Likely, the entrepreneurial spirit of
these young people will continue even in difficult times, or perhaps
unemployment and under-employment provides more reason to branch off and
try something new and innovative. Clearly, the barrier to entry for many
business ideas has fallen precipitously. Today, twentysomethings with novel
ideas and the ability to write basic software code are inventing
multimillion- or even multibillion-dollar iPhone apps (like Instagram).
Hard work, ambition, and a healthy skepticism of old ideas and market
models are the secret sauce of Silicon Valley and other innovation hubs
throughout the United States.
The full utilization of American ingenuity and innovation demands these
entrepreneurs, and thankfully there is no shortage of dreamers willing to
take big risks and run with ideas, ideas that often seem crazy at first.
While innovation can happen just about anywhere—Silicon Valley, a parent’s
basement, a college dorm room—in Washington, D.C., policymakers have a
different job: It’s less about encouraging than it is about *not stifling* our
promising startups.
In my time in Silicon Valley visiting startups, angel funders, and VCs, no
one asked me about new tax breaks or government-sponsored startup
incubators. But I heard repeated concerns regarding problems with our
immigration policy and numerous accounts of the difficulties
navigating our ineffective
patent
system<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=f68237853b&e=4742a9cece>
and
how our current implementation of copyright, as opposed to constitutional
copyright, discourages innovation, hurts content creators, and reduces the
amount of content available for the consumer.
We can harness the incredible resource of human ingenuity, the greatest
force for economic growth in history. But in order to do so, Congress needs
to use care in creating and updating regulatory and legal structures that
promote innovation. And right now, Congress may be poised to weaken what
was once a model of forward-looking legislation.
Before 1996, website owners could be held liable for the content
(defamation, false information, sexual content, etc.) posted by their
users. As a clear example of the perverse effects that often exist with
poorly written laws and regulation, the more that a website regulated
content that was illegal or defamatory, then the more likely it was to be
held legally liable for content it didn’t find. This policy meant that
website owners had an incentive not to police user content on their website
at all. Overall, it created a high bar for any website with user-generated
content.
Congress responded with Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act in
1996. Section 230 is a relatively straightforward solution to this problem:
Now, most websites aren’t liable for user-generated content (with the
exception of intellectual property which is mainly dealt with under Section
512 of the DMCA).
Let’s say Section 230 was never implemented, and Reddit’s future founders
arranged a meeting with their members of Congress to propose changing the
law to facilitate their market model for a message board on the Internet.
Assuming they didn’t ask the member of Congress who referred to the
Internet as “a series of tubes,” it is likely that the politicians would
respond, “This is such a small market, and a silly idea, so why would we
bother changing the law for you?” And yet, today Reddit is a billion-dollar
company and according, to one
study<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=e677fcfb44&e=4742a9cece>,
6 percent of adults on the Internet are Reddit users (including me).
Section 230 is simple and intuitive to entrepreneurs, and it doesn’t
require a lawyer to implement. It’s essentially a permission slip telling
the Internet: “Go innovate.” And entrepreneurs, such as Alexis Ohanian,
co-founder of Reddit, responded by launching a diverse array of websites
with user-generated content. Facebook—which currently has 1.2 billion
users, or one-eighth of the world’s population—would have been impossible
without Section 230. Ben Huh, CEO of the Section 230-enabled Cheezburger
Network, told me: “Section 230 is one of the hidden pillars of the free
speech of the Internet.”
It’s impossible to know what innovations we are currently missing out on
today but for simple reforms like Section 230 – there are no lobbyists for
the future that represent the interests of non-existent industries.
Reddit’s co-founder, Alex Ohanian notes in his upcoming book,*Without Their
Permission<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=c8b88342db&e=4742a9cece>
*:
I saw the power of the free market at my dinner table growing up, as the
internet disrupted my own father's small travel agency. Did he hire
lobbyists and lawyers to add laws to protect travel agents? No, he adapted
his business. And that's served as a role model for me ever since:
innovate, don't legislate.
If we are serious about growth, innovation, and a robust economic
recovery, Washington should listen to entrepreneurs like Ohanian, Huh, Mark
Zuckerberg, and Twitter’s Jack Dorsey and ensure that Washington does not
inhibit new forms of innovation. Congress needs to assess current and
proposed laws to ensure that they provide clear rules of the road like
Section 230.
Unfortunately, Congress is at risk of regressing. Now 47 state attorneys
generals are
asking<http://fixpolitics.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=cd402f9e2ef0031b859d17eac&id=858c853052&e=4742a9cece>Congress
to change the section. Currently it reads:
Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the enforcement of
section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or
110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of Title 18, or any other
Federal criminal statute.
--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
