Arts + Labs advisor Andrew Keen will be the closing luncheon speaker at the Technology Policy Institute's Aspen Forum, scheduled for August 22nd - August 24th.  Keen will offer remarks on "The Creative Economy or a Tragedy of the Creative Commons?" focusing on the importance of intellectual property rights for the Internet and the possible consequences if we lack systems to enforce such rights.  He will join other influential industry leaders and policy experts at the event to discuss key issues affecting innovation in the technology and communications sectors. 

The Aspen Forum will be held at the St. Regis Aspen Resort, August 22nd - 24th.  To register, please visit www.techpolicyinstitute.org/aspen2010. For additional information, please contact Jane Creel at jcreel@techpolicyinstitute.org. Members of the press can contact Amy Smorodin at asmorodin@techpolicyinstitute.org

By Mike McCurry and Mark McKinnon

Amazon's Paul Misener has interrupted the hottest of Washington summers with a cool breeze of rationality in the net neutrality debate.  Writing today on CNet, Mr. Misener mapped out what he calls a "a win-win-win" solution that will make consumers, net operators, and content providers alike better off.  While we don't agree with every particular, it suggests to us agreement is possible.

Mr. Misener notes that the current impasse discourages investment and innovation to everybody's detriment especially at a time of general economic weakness:

"The legal/regulatory uncertainties have, understandably, dissuaded network operators from making investments in new technologies and services that might subsequently be found to violate Net neutrality. Unfortunately, some observers seem to think that this uncertainty hurts only the network operators and their suppliers, but consumers and content providers also are suffering, albeit unwittingly, from the lack of new services that might otherwise be available."

We also are pleased that Mr. Misener parallels our own suggestions that the goal of any anti-discrimination rule is to protect the user experience, and that the best test of any proposed new services is whether or not they harm other users.  As he explains:

"If paid performance enhancement for some content is equally available and does not degrade the performance of other content, then it should be permissible."

Arts+Labs hopes Mr. Misener's commentary stimulates others to find a peace settlement in this long debate.  It seems to us that opening the door to new investment and innovation that improves online performance is a pretty good idea that will help enable content providers to access new services and test new business models for delivering high quality and legal content to consumers.

Ending this fight also would put the focus back on such fundamental issues as universal connectivity and the continued development of safe, legal and innovative online content and applications.

We regret that an issue for which there are such clear, reasonable and effective solutions which promote smart networks and new service choices while still preventing anti-competitive behavior has gone down such a controversial and contentious path.

There is broad, bipartisan opposition to reclassification in Congress, and increasing realization within the creative and technology communities that creative rights and the creative economy depend on the certainty of tech investments, which result in the development of new businesses and intelligent networks that are threatened by this Title ll reclassification.

We believe the future of creative rights is not well served by regulations that limit how creators can collaborate, innovate and protect their creative rights.  Instead, we hope the Commission will recognize that their goal should be to check harmful behavior, not to regulate creative and technological innovation in ways that will ultimately disrupt the vibrant Internet ecosystem and limit consumer choice.

Art's + Labs advisor Andrew Keen participated in a debate at the National Press Club on the discuss the topic "Is democracy threatened by the unchecked nature of information on the Internet?"

Here are some of the highlights:

On the notion that the web can harm democracy:

It depends, of course, what you mean by democracy. Jimmy [Wales]'s definition of democracy was an anti-federalist position, a sort of an idealized, direct-democracy rhetoric which suggests (and I'm quoting him now) that "It's all about the people deciding." But of course at the foundation this country is a representative democracy, not a direct democracy, in which the federalists won over the anti-federalists.

The premise of democracy is not about the people deciding; it's about finding educated, high-quality political figures who will make wise decisions about the community. So I think Jimmy is falling into the old trap of appropriating democracy for his own ends.

On the notion that the Internet is, fundamentally, technology:

One of the mistakes we make about the Internet is that it's technology. It isn't; it's ideology. The Internet was built by people who questioned authority. The Internet is bound up in a fundamental assault on the notion of expertise, on what Jimmy calls 'the mainstream media,' which includes shows like this, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal. And the idea that representative democracy, experts -- whether in media, in politics, in the arts, in legal affairs, in intellectual affairs -- are unreliable and need to be replaced by what Jimmy calls 'the people' is deeply dangerous.

What I most fear about the Internet -- which...we all use; I'm as addicted as everybody else -- is the way we take this technology, which has no center, is flattened, has done away with authority and expertise -- we take this technology to prove the ideological, idealized theories of Jimmy Wales. The truth is, we need expertise, we need authority, we need to remind ourselves of the foundations of representative democracy."

Read more here.

A debate on the topic "Internet and Democracy: Democracy is threatened by the unchecked nature of information on the Internet."  will be held tonight at 7 PM ET at the National Press Club.  The event can be viewed live online by visiting the Miller Center of Public Affairs.

The debate will be moderated by Paul Solman, Business and Economics Correspondent, PBS NewsHour, and the participants will include:

Andrew Keen, Arts + Labs advisor and author of "The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing our Culture"

Farhad Manjoo, journalist for Slate, and author of "True Enough: Learning to Live in a Post-Fact Society"

Jimmy Wales, founder, Wikipedia

Micah L. Sifry, editor, Personal Democracy Forum

Arts + Labs Responds to NPRM on Preserving a Free and Open Internet:

"As the time grows closer for a Commission decision on proposed rules to preserve an Open Internet, Arts+Labs is pleased that serious participants in the policy arena are narrowing their differences on the key issues.   While a handful of the most ardent advocates remain wedded to an "all or nothing" posture, those individuals and organizations that actively participate in the Internet ecosystem, invest in the infrastructure, develop the content, create and maintain websites, operate the search engines, write the software, and manufacture the equipment recognize that the time is coming closer to resolve the debate and put in place a reasonable framework that will enable all of us to move forward with certainty about the rules.
 
Our reading of comments filed with the Commission and other public statements reveals consensus support that the existing four wireline principles that have long guided the Commission's commitment to an open Internet based on a clear set of user rights also should continue to guide industry behavior.   We also see strong support for a new 'transparency' principle that ensures that Internet users know what they are paying for and can be confident that they are receiving the promised goods and services.  For our part, we believe that meaningful transparency would provide strong support for the user protections embodied in the existing principles and would also deter harmful discrimination in the future.
 
We find growing support for robust 'network management' that enables network operators to address threats to the network, respond effectively to congestion, combat spam and viruses, and confront a growing range of cybersecurity threats.   For operators, the ability to manage their networks will enable them to move forward with cost-effective investment that enables them to enhance quality and not just frantically add bandwidth that enables
them to run in place with exploding consumer demand.   For consumers, effective network management translates into a better online experience with fewer delays and disruptions especially for the expanding universe of latency-sensitive activities like streaming video and VoIP phone calling.
 
While there remains some disagreement over how best to define 'reasonable network management,' Arts+Labs believes that the basis exists for final agreement."

  Download the entire response here

"The Digital Economy: Threats and Opportunities" at the 2011 Media Summit in New York. on March 10th, moderated by Arts + Labs advisor Andrew Keen.

Speakers:

Brian Napack, President, Macmillan Publishing
Channing Dawson, SVP of Emerging Media, Scripps
Rick Cotton, EVP & General Counsel, NBCU
Jeff Turner, Founder & CTO, Interstream
C. Lincoln Hoewing, Vice President of Internet and Technology Policy, Verizon

.

Today, Arts+Labs submitted comments to the IPEC in regard to the delvelopment of a joint strategic plan:

"Arts+Labs, an alliance of the technology, content and creative communities, appreciates the opportunity to comment on the development of a strategic plan for aggressive enforcement of the intellectual property of U.S. rights holders.  Arts+Labs' goal is a strong information economy, based on innovation, creativity and respect for the rights of all participants...   
 
...Even in a world of "bits" and "bytes," the continued development of content is contingent on respect for creators' intellectual  property.  Authors, musicians, filmmakers, inventors, software writers, game developers, journalists and others who earn a living by creating content are entitled to control the use of their work and to a genuine opportunity to earn fair and adequate remuneration.  Absent those assurances, the professional creators on which so much of our economy is based will be discouraged from new creative work.  The result will be diminution in the volume and quality of online content and the loss of the general economic benefits that flow from this work."

 

Full document

Rick Carnes, president of the Songwriters Guild of America defends his record as an advocate of artist's rights.

"In a recent article in The Hill Public Knowledge's Gigi Sohn questioned why I have taken a position on Net Neutrality "so at odds with individual artists and so in line with Big Media".

I would simply reply that my record in fighting for songwriters and artists is, pardon the expression, public knowledge. I have fought in every major battle for creators' rights since joining the board of the Songwriters Guild of America (SGA) back in 1985.

As SGA vice president I fought alongside the Writers Guild of America, the Directors Guild, Screen Actors Guild, American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and the American Federation of Musicians to get the Bono Copyright extension passed. Public Knowledge opposed us"

Read the entire article at The Huffington Post.

Part 2   Part 3