Internet: A Legal Right

Discuss events that have an impact on you and the world today. A home for honest, serious, and open discussion.

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby Patricoo » Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:32 pm

Ranbir wrote:Even as a right, that doesn't directly mean it would be 'free'.


We can still discuss the idea of giving free internet to all its people.
"Yey and did Fonzi downstairs cometh from his apartment from above the garage. And sayeth he, 'Reassembeleth will I, the pieces of my motorcycle, though I suffereth from temporary blindness. And yey for I am holy. Amen."
User avatar
Patricoo
Langzhong
 
Posts: 550
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 2:37 pm
Location: Everywhere between Harrisburg and Philadelphia

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby Ranbir » Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:37 pm

A lot of wireless hotspots have popped up in urban districts which allow free access.
"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz
Science snobbery.
User avatar
Ranbir
For Queen and Country
 
Posts: 8538
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 9:27 am
Location: Your heart. <3

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:47 am

Okay, free-access wireless hotspots are fine and good. But I would suggest that the converse of what you said is true also: just because it is free does not mean that it is a 'right'. You can have something for free without being explicitly, legally entitled to it.

I think that making internet access nominally free for everyone might be a good idea, but people have to have some kind of reciprocal responsibility for it. (I think the same about health care, by the way.)

Also, James:

James wrote:I'm all for net neutrality, keeping the government out of the internet, keeping the internet tax free, and all that other jazz—but declaring it a right and forcing businesses to provide customers with free internet access?


I know we've discussed this before, but net neutrality requires, practically by definition, putting the government in the internet. You can't have any kind of meaningful net neutrality unless you place specific, systemic state regulations on telecom corporations and other ISPs (who have both the capability and a history of restricting and artificially slowing access to information).
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby James' iPhone » Sun Oct 18, 2009 6:59 pm

Ranbir wrote:Even as a right, that doesn't directly mean it would be 'free'.

if you have the right to *buy* internet of a certain speed then it isn't free, but when discussing a right, if price isn't specifically mentioned, it is free. What rights, which don't specifically state a cost, aren't free? A right is something you are entitled to, no matter what (outside limitations specifically expressed).

The article originally linked, while it sounds it may be misleading, is quite clear interms of language.
User avatar
James' iPhone
Initiate
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 7:54 am

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby James » Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:26 pm

WeiWenDi wrote:I know we've discussed this before, but net neutrality requires, practically by definition, putting the government in the internet. You can't have any kind of meaningful net neutrality unless you place specific, systemic state regulations on telecom corporations and other ISPs (who have both the capability and a history of restricting and artificially slowing access to information).

I think what we have here are a few lazily identified talking points which have been strung together. There's a lot to the net neutrality discussion and all I can really hope to do is address and ponder each discussion as it is brought up. Similarly, there are aspects of net neutrality, which I support, that would need to be enforced by the government. Conversely, when I say 'keeping the government out of the internet' I'm talking more about things like taxation and content control.
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 17999
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:51 pm

James wrote:I think what we have here are a few lazily identified talking points which have been strung together. There's a lot to the net neutrality discussion and all I can really hope to do is address and ponder each discussion as it is brought up. Similarly, there are aspects of net neutrality, which I support, that would need to be enforced by the government. Conversely, when I say 'keeping the government out of the internet' I'm talking more about things like taxation and content control.


Thanks for the clarification; I agree with you that net neutrality is a very involved topic. My view is that when one talks about a government's activities, they generally only have two tools to shape a social structure as intricate and nebulous as the Internet - and those are taxation and regulation. And we can talk about what kind of shape we ultimately want to see - personally, I'm also opposed to direct content control by the government, but I'd also like to see some limitations on what advertisers can do on search engines, for example.

... But that's another discussion.
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
WeiWenDi
Hedgehog Emperor
 
Posts: 3855
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby Ranbir » Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:17 am

Right to keep arms doesn't mention a cost, no free glocks distributed around. Does anything in the Bill of Rights mention a price tag?

A right is something you are entitled to, no matter what


A right is something that can not be denied to you. Cost is really another issue, I see.


EU regulation helped bring down Apple's Fairplay drm! Hooray for 'plus'!
"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz
Science snobbery.
User avatar
Ranbir
For Queen and Country
 
Posts: 8538
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 9:27 am
Location: Your heart. <3

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby James » Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:33 am

Ranbir wrote:Right to keep arms doesn't mention a cost, no free glocks distributed around. Does anything in the Bill of Rights mention a price tag?
A right is something you are entitled to, no matter what

A right is something that can not be denied to you. Cost is really another issue, I see.

Do I really need to point out the flaw in your argument here?
A right to own a gun is different from a right to be provided with a gun.

Ranbir wrote:EU regulation helped bring down Apple's Fairplay drm! Hooray for 'plus'!

Seriously? Oh, terrible terrible Apple. They made us all suffer with DRM. Oh, wait. It was the recording industry and record labels that made us suffer with DRM. Steve Jobs hated it from the start and insisted that it would prevent sales from taking place. As soon as labels dropped the requirement Apple removed it from their music in the store.

Do some reading about this before you even bother.
Kongming’s Archives – Romance of the Three Kingdoms Novel, History and Games
“ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  — Ben Franklin
User avatar
James
Sausaged Fish
Sausaged Fish
 
Posts: 17999
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 3:21 pm
Location: Happy Valley, UT

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby Ranbir » Tue Oct 20, 2009 8:50 am

Steve Jobs hated it


Do you really believe that? Do you think he really hated a mechanism which enabled him to lock customers between Apple products? Yeah, it was the record companies that stopped Apple from licensing Fairplay out. Despite the fact it fits in perfectly with how Apple like to conduct their business; Using propriety technology enabled them to use the sales of iPod to drive the sales on the iTunes platform.

Apple dropped it when rising platforms became viable DRM-free/non-propriety competitors, allowing record companies to diversify. When DRM-Free sales were outpacing DRM sales and when FairPlay was made illegal in countries.

Record companies weren't as powerful in this as you have been led to believe. Apple were always in a position where they could dictate the economic terms and dictate the business models.

Edit: Let's also keep in mind smaller companies/independent artists that asked for no restrictions were denied by Apple. Surely Steve Jobs would have jumped at the chance of supporting the independents and had their music free from their propriety technology?

Do some reading about this before you even bother.


Wrote an article on it last year. :wink:
"The imaginary number is a fine and wonderful resource of the human spirit, almost an amphibian between being and not being." - Gottfried Leibniz
Science snobbery.
User avatar
Ranbir
For Queen and Country
 
Posts: 8538
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 9:27 am
Location: Your heart. <3

Re: Internet: A Legal Right

Unread postby Shikanosuke » Tue Oct 20, 2009 4:15 pm

I'm honestly a tad confused, perhaps so because I'm not positive how some these basic human rights exist in European countries in relation to here. The article likens the "internet right" to the right to commodities such as water and electricity. Are these things free in Finland/European countries? Or is just the right to have access to them (and at certain qualities) available? Here, we have to pay for these things. This means that they definitely aren't free, even if it access to them is mandated. If I'm missing something here, do tell me.

As I've read the debate I can sum up my feelings fairly succinctly given which interpretation of the article we're going to adopt. If the article is to be read as 'internet is to be a right, and provided to all free of cost' then I'm not for it. If it is merely the right to have access to it at a certain quality, I don't really care and Finland doesn't strike me as a country who cares if they trample certain aspects of capitalism.
User avatar
Shikanosuke
Scholar of Shen Zhou
 
Posts: 4388
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:22 am
Location: US

PreviousNext

Return to Current Affairs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved