A "free and open web" discussion

[Kevin Spidel]

How do you define a "free and open web?"

Should the web be "free and open?"

Free speech to what ends?

Free download and file sharing to what end?

As fellow progressives, I am curious what limits (if any) would you put on the web?

Can an activity and/or company say what ever they want and be policed by whom?

What about directory listings? Herbal, MMJ, Adult services? What is too much?

What about the freedom to buy your RX from anywhere because of the internet?

What about MMJ/Dispensaries not able to advertise on most sites? Is this a good thing?

Just curious where do you draw the line as a consumer?

[saras]

1. I draw the line at being defined as a consumer.

That model fails, like it always fails at describing relationships. The internet is a place to create relationships. I no more want commerce in all my internet relationships than I want commerce in all my sexual relationships.

Free speech? To any ends that are otherwise legal - the internet shouldn't change that. Of course I don't believe that commercial speech, of any sort, should have been given equal Constitutional protection with political speech, but that's a different issue than the internet. That was just a mistake on the part of the Court, like most decisions regarding corporations have been.

Free downloading and file sharing: to the end of putting an end to the concept of intellectual property, to the degree that that concept is used to set private profit above human progress. The world would have had fine porcelain a few hundred years earlier, and with tens of thousands of fewer deaths at war, if not for intellectual property, but a few people wouldn't have been as wealthy. Pretty much the same story with mirrors in Europe - an ENORMOUS amount of repression went into trying to keep the knowledge of mirror-making secret for generations, instead of merely paying the development costs and moving on, which is the only legitimate purpose IP serves. No, I don't think a songwriter deserves to get paid for everyone who listens to their song fifty years later any more than a carpenter deserves to get paid fifty years later every time someone uses a house he built, and yes, I am a songwriter.

What is too much is too much without the internet - I just don't see any justification for arbitrary restrictions based on the idea that "it's the internet". Do you?

[Kevin Spidel]

2. Thank you.

Perfect response. Thank you.

So my question, is that illegal offline illegal online? So bootlegging, file sharing is one in the same? Illegal?

Is professional adult services online protected as free speech illegal because prostitution is?

Does buying RX from Canada online illegal because the transport of RX from Mexico and Canada is illegal off-line without a proper permit/license?

I want to agree with you about the not seeing any justification for arbitrary restrictions based on the idea that "it's the internet" however free speech online (directory listing, advertising, etc) can fuel illegal activity. Is the responsibility on the author of that content or the reader/adopter of the content?

[The Straight Story]

3. Think of it this way:

The postal service.

People can (or should) be able to write letters to one another saying what they want.

Be it individuals or clubs. Once you start selling things it becomes interstate commerce to some degree.

The internet is like the postal service, only faster it is a method of communication. Speech is protected as much as anywhere else (ie, left up to groups and people) and commerce is also protected but regulated.

[Kevin Spidel]

4. Enforcement

Thank you. So should enforcement of these regulations ONLINE = OFFLINE standards/norms?

Who is held accountable?

[The Straight Story]

5. The difference, in this case, is the delivery/origination system

Back to the post office - generally one entity controlling end to end delivery. The enforcement happens at the originating source and destination (say, someone sells pot and someone takes delivery). The entity delivering the message (the post office) is not to blame. ISP's, etc, are not to blame for the traffic on their highway (and while they can inspect packets of data the PO could also open and re-seal all packages as well...just not gonna happen).

Norms change to fit the times. Our roads used to be for horses, then cars, now trucks, motorcycles, etc. Different vehicles have different regulations and methods of enforcement (you don't pull a car off onto a scale to get weighed like you do a truck).

Any enforcement/regs need to be specific to the internet as it is different - although similar principles exist with other entities (as noted).

The reason it is hard to say is that it is newer, the affects of changing a law (or applying it) are not always clear but over time, and with more discussion and input from people, something sensible that maintains the integrity and openness of the net will prevail and logic and freedom will win out.

[Kevin Spidel]

6. What responsibilities are in there in a free an open web?

I good article on the "Backpage" dilema here:

http://www.salon.com/2012/03/25/the_backpage_dilemma/singleton/

Backpage is attempting to both prevent traffickers from advertising on the site and to assist law enforcement in cases where they do slip through — but is it enough? The site’s outspoken critics certainly don’t think so. Short of no longer carrying sex ads, Kristoff suggests that Backpage require an ID check for those placing ads to ensure that they are adults — but that only addresses trafficking cases where the minor is advertising herself. “I assume that critics sometimes urge age verification anyway because child sex trafficking is a horrific crime and we want to feel active in fighting it,” McDougall says. “But it does not help the problem to advocate measures that have superficial appeal but no real effect.”

Ultimately, most critics will accept nothing less than the site shutting down its adult section — but this will likely direct business elsewhere (just as Craigslist’s shuttering of its adult section drove traffic to Backpage), and potentially to less cooperative businesses.

That’s not to mention that many sex worker activists argue that closing Backpage’s adult section will make it harder, and more dangerous, for those who are willingly in the industry to ply their trade. “What it comes down to is what keeps the most people the most safe, and what actually makes sense for sex workers,” says Sarah Patterson, a community organizer for the Sex Worker’s Outreach Project’s New Work City chapter. She argues that the ultimate answer is decriminalizing sex work while also protecting those who are being coerced into the business; and in this particular case, she says it’s allowing adults to sell sexual services on Backpage while also going after those selling non-consensual services. “For a lot of people that’s really hard to imagine,” she says, explaining that sex work is generally seen only in black and white terms. “Unfortunately for me, that is the solution.”