Sony CEO Michael Lynton has written an interesting essay at the Huffington Post. Essentially, his point is that the internet gives us a tremendous opportunity, but only with rules that promote and encourage both individual rights and commerce.
The questions are not about whether we will have standards, but what our social, technological and legal standards are, how they will emerge and how (or whether) they will be enforced.
In a sense, our social standards and mores might be thought of as a kind of code that has developed over the history of our society. And while we have generally incorporated our social standards and mores into legal code, we are still learning how to incorporate them into technological code.
In a recent essay at Cato Unbound, Larry Lessig wrote that "there can be "code failures" ... that threaten important values that we all should ... hold dear." Lynton's argument is that we have a social and legal code that respects the individual rights of creators, and it is important that our digital society also account for these mores and laws. As Larry Lessig also wrote at Cato Unbound, there are times "when "no law" is the inducement to "bad code," and where a "good law" would stanch evolution to bad code."
What those codes look like will "be found only with time", but "no code" for these values we hold dear (the rights of creators) would be a code failure.
In that sense, Michael Lynton is indisputably correct that we need "standards of commerce". And it's very good that he (and Sony) also recognize that we need creators who "meet [the digital] demand as efficiently and effectively as possible".
A final point: Earlier today, Arts+Labs spokesman Mike McCurry and I exchanged a few emails about Lynton's essay, and he made an interesting point (which I reproduce here with his permission): "Michael Lynton is only asking for some civilization to prevail within the digital society of the Internet. We want an ethical structure to that society that allows creativity and innovation to prosper and that can happen with the right protocols and standards -- his plea is for fundamental fairness and honesty."
We have social and legal standards and mores for our analog society. It is time we start solving these problems for our digital society.
Contrast the expansion of the Internet with what happened a half century ago. In the 1950's, the Eisenhower Administration undertook one of the most massive infrastructure projects in our nation's history -- the creation of the Interstate Highway System. It completely transformed how we did business, traveled, and conducted our daily lives. But unlike the Internet, the highways were built and operated with a set of rational guidelines. Guard rails went along dangerous sections of the road. Speed and weight limits saved lives and maintenance costs. And officers of the law made sure that these rules were obeyed. As a result, as interstates flourished, so did the economy. [...]Lynton's essay has met with some criticism, but I think a lot of the criticisms amount to semantic disputes over what he means by "rules". Here's the thing: nobody really disputes the importance of having social, technological and legal standards. They are the basis of a functioning society (see: social contract), and they are equally important in a digital society.
We can replicate that kind of success with the Internet more easily if we do more to encourage the productivity of the creative engines of our society -- the artists, actors, writers, directors, singers and other holders of intellectual property rights -- yes, including the movie studios, which help produce and distribute entertainment to billions of people worldwide.
But, without standards of commerce and more action against piracy, the intellectual property of humankind will be subject to infinite exploitation on the Internet. [...] Freedom without restraint is chaos, and if we don't figure out some way to prevent online chaos, the quantity, quality and availability of the kinds of entertainment, literature, art and scholarship we need to have a healthy, vibrant culture will suffer.
The questions are not about whether we will have standards, but what our social, technological and legal standards are, how they will emerge and how (or whether) they will be enforced.
In a sense, our social standards and mores might be thought of as a kind of code that has developed over the history of our society. And while we have generally incorporated our social standards and mores into legal code, we are still learning how to incorporate them into technological code.
In a recent essay at Cato Unbound, Larry Lessig wrote that "there can be "code failures" ... that threaten important values that we all should ... hold dear." Lynton's argument is that we have a social and legal code that respects the individual rights of creators, and it is important that our digital society also account for these mores and laws. As Larry Lessig also wrote at Cato Unbound, there are times "when "no law" is the inducement to "bad code," and where a "good law" would stanch evolution to bad code."
What those codes look like will "be found only with time", but "no code" for these values we hold dear (the rights of creators) would be a code failure.
In that sense, Michael Lynton is indisputably correct that we need "standards of commerce". And it's very good that he (and Sony) also recognize that we need creators who "meet [the digital] demand as efficiently and effectively as possible".
A final point: Earlier today, Arts+Labs spokesman Mike McCurry and I exchanged a few emails about Lynton's essay, and he made an interesting point (which I reproduce here with his permission): "Michael Lynton is only asking for some civilization to prevail within the digital society of the Internet. We want an ethical structure to that society that allows creativity and innovation to prosper and that can happen with the right protocols and standards -- his plea is for fundamental fairness and honesty."
We have social and legal standards and mores for our analog society. It is time we start solving these problems for our digital society.
Leave a comment