IPcentral Weblog
  The DACA Blog
  Institutions
     
  Tanks
     
  Blogs
     
  Mags
     

Friday, September 10, 2010

 
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
(previous | next)
 

In the National Law Journal, Dan Brenner's piece, Apps decision: no big deal, provides a thoughtful debunking of the hype that surrounded this summer's decision by the Librarian of Congress to exempt the "jailbreaking" of iPhones from the anti-circumvention provisions of 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a). I tried to make similar points back when the ruling was first issued, but I think that Brenner has better explained the underlying issues.

At the time, I found the furor over this particular exemption baffling. Since then, I have realized that some were trying to believe that a 1201(a) exemption relating to the iPhone would fatally undermine the "walled garden" approach that Apple has pursued as to many of its products—an approach that has inspired delight and confidence among actual consumers, but fear and loathing in academics like Jonathan Zittrain. Brenner explains why this is not so.

I was also impressed that Brenner stressed a point that probably should be stressed more often during debates about technology policy: Antitrust and competition law exist to ensure that we do not need to do more harm than good by prospectively trying to identify and forbid every combination of property rights, new technologies, network effects, and circumstances that could lead to some Bad Thing happening.

This is an important point. Apart from the self-parodying sexist tirade in which William Patry denounced DRM as a Stalinist, Fascist chastity-belt-on-someone-else's wife, we really haven't seen much DRM doom-mongering lately. On the other hand, many former DRM-doom-mongers merely shifted to mongering other forms of allegedly impending Internet doom.

In almost every case, the hypothetical harms potentially threatened by the doom-of-the-week being prophesied would require multiple, sustained violations of antitrust laws—even those that were not being enforced too aggressively, as such laws often are. Nevertheless, properly enforced competition laws serve as a useful check against the need for the sorts of prophylactic restraints inevitably advocated by those hypothecating hypothetical horribles.

posted by Thomas Sydnor @ 11:35 AM | Antitrust & Competition Policy , Copyright , IP , Internet

Share |

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment(5)

Comments

First time poster, but a long time reader. Thanks for the work you put into your blog!

Posted by: Matt at November 2, 2010 12:23 AM

If you could e-mail me with a few suggestions on just how you made your blog look this excellent, I would be grateful.

Posted by: CNA Training at November 9, 2010 9:52 PM

On la bottom des expériences dont j'ai eu, on vais donner united nations aperçu de quelques-unes certains choses que on pense pourrait décaler les activities du club del avant.Certaines choses ze posera vraiment bien ainsi que ils volent, certaines choses ne fonctionnent pas ainsi que il sera temperatures de passer à autre decided. C'est une query de recherche signifiant cette formule gagnante. abercrombie & fitchles 4 re qui le maintiennent,

Posted by: abercrombie & fitch at November 28, 2013 3:00 AM

The Progress & Freedom Foundation Blog
www.skyrim-origins.fr http://www.skyrim-origins.fr/

Posted by: www.skyrim-origins.fr at March 6, 2014 7:47 AM

Paroi rocheuse Lune rebond de clown artiste ballon Ralph Laurenzoo park ballons alimentaire et de nutrition activties boisson gratuite conditioning, santé et as well as!

Posted by: Ralph Lauren at May 17, 2014 2:08 PM

Post a Comment:





 
Blog Main
RSS Feed  
Recent Posts
  EFF-PFF Amicus Brief in Schwarzenegger v. EMA Supreme Court Videogame Violence Case
New OECD Study Finds That Improved IPR Protections Benefit Developing Countries
Hubris, Cowardice, File-sharing, and TechDirt
iPhones, DRM, and Doom-Mongers
"Rogue Archivist" Carl Malamud On How to Fix Gov2.0
Coping with Information Overload: Thoughts on Hamlet's BlackBerry by William Powers
How Many Times Has Michael "Dr. Doom" Copps Forecast an Internet Apocalypse?
Google / Verizon Proposal May Be Important Compromise, But Regulatory Trajectory Concerns Many
Two Schools of Internet Pessimism
GAO: Wireless Prices Plummeting; Public Knowledge: We Must Regulate!
Archives by Month
  September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
  - (see all)
Archives by Topic
  - A La Carte
- Add category
- Advertising & Marketing
- Antitrust & Competition Policy
- Appleplectics
- Books & Book Reviews
- Broadband
- Cable
- Campaign Finance Law
- Capitalism
- Capitol Hill
- China
- Commons
- Communications
- Copyright
- Cutting the Video Cord
- Cyber-Security
- DACA
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- Digital TV
- E-commerce
- e-Government & Transparency
- Economics
- Education
- Electricity
- Energy
- Events
- Exaflood
- Free Speech
- Gambling
- General
- Generic Rant
- Global Innovation
- Googlephobia
- Googlephobia
- Human Capital
- Innovation
- Intermediary Deputization & Section 230
- Internet
- Internet Governance
- Internet TV
- Interoperability
- IP
- Local Franchising
- Mass Media
- Media Regulation
- Monetary Policy
- Municipal Ownership
- Net Neutrality
- Neutrality
- Non-PFF Podcasts
- Ongoing Series
- Online Safety & Parental Controls
- Open Source
- PFF
- PFF Podcasts
- Philosophy / Cyber-Libertarianism
- Privacy
- Privacy Solutions
- Regulation
- Search
- Security
- Software
- Space
- Spectrum
- Sports
- State Policy
- Supreme Court
- Taxes
- The FCC
- The FTC
- The News Frontier
- Think Tanks
- Trade
- Trademark
- Universal Service
- Video Games & Virtual Worlds
- VoIP
- What We're Reading
- Wireless
- Wireline
Archives by Author
PFF Blogosphere Archives
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.
 










The Progress & Freedom Foundation