1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:02,791
[I'm using this English GB track to script audio descriptions - CA] [Innovation & its Enemies]

2
00:00:02,791 --> 00:00:04,580
[<1>]

3
00:00:04,580 --> 00:00:05,092
So, I apologize that I am going to introduce these

4
00:00:05,092 --> 00:00:07,054
ideas so early in the morning,

5
00:00:07,054 --> 00:00:09,049
after such a late night last night.

6
00:00:09,049 --> 00:00:13,677
But I'll like you to think of an alcoholic.

7
00:00:13,743 --> 00:00:14,381
[photo of drunk sleeping on the earth]

8
00:00:14,673 --> 00:00:15,173
And I don't mean the kind of drop-dead

9
00:00:15,173 --> 00:00:16,083
drunken alcoholic,

10
00:00:16,160 --> 00:00:16,864
[picture of AA meeting]

11
00:00:16,972 --> 00:00:20,092
or somebody who is even recovering from AA.

12
00:00:20,092 --> 00:00:21,035
[Bottles: vodka and other spirits]

13
00:00:21,035 --> 00:00:23,024
I am thinking just of the regular alcoholic

14
00:00:23,024 --> 00:00:30,078
who works hard to control the addiction he has.

15
00:00:30,078 --> 00:00:32,071
But this particular alcoholic, I want you to

16
00:00:32,071 --> 00:00:36,010
imagine that, in addition to the addiction to alcohol,

17
00:00:36,010 --> 00:00:39,054
he has a second addiction as well.

18
00:00:39,068 --> 00:00:43,063
Not the debilitating addiction that keeps him

19
00:00:43,063 --> 00:00:44,046
down all day.

20
00:00:44,046 --> 00:00:46,041
And not a recovered drug addict.

21
00:00:46,041 --> 00:00:48,008
But an addiction nonetheless

22
00:00:48,008 --> 00:00:51,027
that continues to pull him in another way,

23
00:00:51,027 --> 00:00:52,089
away from what he wants to do.

24
00:00:52,089 --> 00:00:59,009
A person with two addictions, pulling different ways,

25
00:00:59,009 --> 00:01:01,097
making him vulnerable, making him dangerous,

26
00:01:01,097 --> 00:01:04,082
as he is susceptible to the temptations of each.

27
00:01:04,082 --> 00:01:09,047
And the trick for this soul is to control

28
00:01:09,047 --> 00:01:14,053
and to regulate these addictions, to keep them under control.

29
00:01:14,053 --> 00:01:17,002
Now I give you this picture because

30
00:01:17,002 --> 00:01:23,096
I think it is a good picture of modern democratic government.

31
00:01:23,096 --> 00:01:26,000
Modern democratic government too, is pulled

32
00:01:26,000 --> 00:01:28,012
by these two separate kinds of addictions.

33
00:01:28,012 --> 00:01:31,025
Constantly pulled by craziness.

34
00:01:31,025 --> 00:01:35,073
Craziness to one side for the people, or at least wrongly,

35
00:01:35,073 --> 00:01:37,084
as the people push the government to do what

36
00:01:37,084 --> 00:01:40,035
is not in the public interest.

37
00:01:40,035 --> 00:01:41,077
Think of Peronism,

38
00:01:41,077 --> 00:01:44,095
or the kind of populism that drove the

39
00:01:44,095 --> 00:01:49,029
banking and housing bubble in the United States.

40
00:01:49,029 --> 00:01:52,038
Or in the other hand, an addiction to special interests,

41
00:01:52,038 --> 00:01:56,091
let's call them "incumbents", constantly tempting the government

42
00:01:56,091 --> 00:01:59,030
to do something crazy for public policy

43
00:01:59,030 --> 00:02:01,030
in the name of benefiting the incumbents.

44
00:02:01,030 --> 00:02:04,018
And here, in the United States at least, you can think about

45
00:02:04,018 --> 00:02:08,082
just about every major policy issue where this addiction

46
00:02:08,082 --> 00:02:10,057
has had its role.

47
00:02:10,057 --> 00:02:12,084
Each of these pulling constantly,

48
00:02:12,084 --> 00:02:17,094
constantly tempting, always the government is vulnerable.

49
00:02:17,094 --> 00:02:22,026
Always, as libertarians insist, it is dangerous

50
00:02:22,026 --> 00:02:25,028
because it can always be exploited

51
00:02:25,028 --> 00:02:30,037
by one of these two sources at least,

52
00:02:30,037 --> 00:02:35,013
the temptations of the incumbents.

53
00:02:35,013 --> 00:02:39,091
OK now, the Internet is a platform,

54
00:02:39,091 --> 00:02:41,051
it is an architecture,

55
00:02:41,051 --> 00:02:46,002
it is an architecture with consequences.

56
00:02:46,002 --> 00:02:48,062
It is an architecture that enables innovation,

57
00:02:48,062 --> 00:02:52,052
or at least enables a certain kind of innovation.

58
00:02:52,052 --> 00:02:56,044
Think of the history of innovation in the Internet.

59
00:02:56,044 --> 00:03:02,035
Netscape, started by a drop-out from undergraduate university.

60
00:03:02,043 --> 00:03:04,043
Hotmail, started by an Indian immigrant, sold to

61
00:03:04,043 --> 00:03:07,003
Microsoft for 400 million dollars.

62
00:03:07,003 --> 00:03:11,081
ICQ, started by an Israeli kid and then his father, who was here,

63
00:03:11,081 --> 00:03:14,021
selling it to AOL for 400 million dollars.

64
00:03:14,021 --> 00:03:17,018
Google, started by two Stanford dropouts.

65
00:03:17,018 --> 00:03:21,001
Napster, started by a dropout and someone who

66
00:03:21,001 --> 00:03:22,096
hadn't yet been able to be a dropout,

67
00:03:22,096 --> 00:03:24,091
sitting on this panel, here, today.

68
00:03:24,091 --> 00:03:28,002
Youtube, started by two Stanford students.

69
00:03:28,002 --> 00:03:35,099
Kazaa and Skype, started by kids from Denmark and Sweden.

70
00:03:35,099 --> 00:03:38,056
And then, of course, Facebook, and Twitter, started by kids.

71
00:03:38,056 --> 00:03:42,002
What unites all of these innovations?

72
00:03:42,002 --> 00:03:48,043
They were all done by kids, dropouts, and non-americans.

73
00:03:48,043 --> 00:03:50,038
Outsiders.

74
00:03:50,038 --> 00:03:54,075
Because this is what that architecture invited.

75
00:03:54,075 --> 00:03:58,070
It invited outsider innovation.

76
00:03:58,070 --> 00:04:05,059
Now, outsider innovation threatens the "incumbents".

77
00:04:05,059 --> 00:04:08,012
Skype threatens telephone companies.

78
00:04:08,012 --> 00:04:11,005
Youtube threatens television companies.

79
00:04:11,005 --> 00:04:13,042
Netflix threatens cable companies.

80
00:04:13,042 --> 00:04:16,074
Twitter threatens sanity -

81
00:04:16,074 --> 00:04:18,087
not that sanity was ever an incumbent.

82
00:04:18,087 --> 00:04:25,000
But then the threatened respond to this threat.

83
00:04:25,000 --> 00:04:30,058
By turning to the addict, modern democratic government,

84
00:04:30,058 --> 00:04:34,071
and using drug of choice (which in the United States at least

85
00:04:34,071 --> 00:04:37,089
is an endless amount of campaign cash),

86
00:04:37,089 --> 00:04:42,056
using that drug to secure the protection

87
00:04:42,056 --> 00:04:50,011
against these threats that the incumbent faces.

88
00:04:50,011 --> 00:04:54,045
Now this was the point that I think president Sarkozy missed yesterday,

89
00:04:54,045 --> 00:04:57,074
and the question that Jeff Jarvis raised when he suggested

90
00:04:57,074 --> 00:05:00,018
that the principle that should be carried to the G8

91
00:05:00,018 --> 00:05:03,085
is that the government "do no harm".

92
00:05:03,085 --> 00:05:05,069
President Sarkozy said, no, but we have important

93
00:05:05,069 --> 00:05:08,084
policy issues to resolve. But here is the point.

94
00:05:08,084 --> 00:05:13,025
We get that there are "hard policy" issues here.

95
00:05:13,025 --> 00:05:17,039
From copyright, to privacy to security to the problem of monopoly. We get it.

96
00:05:17,039 --> 00:05:22,050
The point is, is we don't trust the answers the

97
00:05:22,050 --> 00:05:24,036
government gives.

98
00:05:24,036 --> 00:05:27,056
And for good reasons we don't trust these answers,

99
00:05:27,056 --> 00:05:31,041
because on issue after issue, the answer that

100
00:05:31,041 --> 00:05:35,078
modern democratic government has given here,

101
00:05:35,078 --> 00:05:39,017
is an answer that happens to benefit

102
00:05:39,017 --> 00:05:41,024
the incumbents.

103
00:05:41,024 --> 00:05:45,053
And ignores an answer that might actually

104
00:05:45,053 --> 00:05:49,006
encourage more innovation.

105
00:05:49,006 --> 00:05:51,068
So think for example about the matter of copyright.

106
00:05:51,068 --> 00:05:55,024
Of course we need a system of copyright

107
00:05:55,024 --> 00:05:58,065
that guarantees that creators get compensated

108
00:05:58,065 --> 00:06:01,041
and secures their independence to create.

109
00:06:01,041 --> 00:06:05,038
No one serious denies that we have to have

110
00:06:05,038 --> 00:06:08,015
that system of protection.

111
00:06:08,015 --> 00:06:12,063
The question is not whether copyright should be protected.

112
00:06:12,063 --> 00:06:16,027
The question is how to protect copyright

113
00:06:16,027 --> 00:06:17,055
in a digital era.

114
00:06:17,055 --> 00:06:19,086
Whether the architecture of copyright,

115
00:06:19,090 --> 00:06:22,007
built for the XIX century,

116
00:06:22,018 --> 00:06:25,000
continues to make sense in the XXI.

117
00:06:25,000 --> 00:06:30,056
And what is the architecture that would make sense in the XXI?

118
00:06:30,056 --> 00:06:36,062
Now, is this the question the government is asking?

119
00:06:36,062 --> 00:06:38,063
I think the answer to that is no.

120
00:06:38,063 --> 00:06:42,091
Instead, what the government is proposing,

121
00:06:42,091 --> 00:06:45,052
around the world, specially here,

122
00:06:45,061 --> 00:06:47,097
and I apologize to my colleagues from France,

123
00:06:47,097 --> 00:06:49,080
but this is a technical legal term.

124
00:06:49,080 --> 00:06:54,063
The proposal suggested here is a "brain-dead"

125
00:06:54,063 --> 00:07:00,099
3-strikes proposal that happens to benefit incumbents.

126
00:07:01,011 --> 00:07:05,051
Ignoring the potential of innovation that could come from

127
00:07:05,062 --> 00:07:07,099
a new architecture for securing copyright.

128
00:07:07,099 --> 00:07:11,042
And you don't have to take my view for this.

129
00:07:11,042 --> 00:07:14,051
The recent report from the conservative government in Britain,

130
00:07:14,051 --> 00:07:17,055
the Hargreaves report, says of copyright:

131
00:07:17,055 --> 00:07:20,020
"Could it be true that laws designed more than three centuries

132
00:07:20,020 --> 00:07:23,061
ago with the express purpose of creating economic

133
00:07:23,061 --> 00:07:25,019
incentives for innovation,

134
00:07:25,019 --> 00:07:27,086
by protecting creators' rights

135
00:07:27,086 --> 00:07:31,032
are today obstructing innovation and economic growth?"

136
00:07:31,032 --> 00:07:33,050
The short answer is: "yes".

137
00:07:33,050 --> 00:07:37,092
"In the case of copyright policy, there is no doubt

138
00:07:37,092 --> 00:07:40,026
that the persuasive powers of celebrities and

139
00:07:40,026 --> 00:07:42,019
important UK creative companies

140
00:07:42,019 --> 00:07:44,081
have distorted policy outcomes."

141
00:07:44,081 --> 00:07:48,037
And not just, I suggest, in the UK.

142
00:07:48,037 --> 00:07:50,080
Think about the question of broadband policy.

143
00:07:50,080 --> 00:07:53,047
Europe, has actually been quite successful,

144
00:07:53,047 --> 00:07:57,010
in pushing competition in broadband,

145
00:07:57,010 --> 00:07:59,088
and therefore pushing broadband growth.

146
00:07:59,088 --> 00:08:05,066
The US has been a dismal failure in this respect.

147
00:08:05,066 --> 00:08:09,045
As we watch the US going from number 1 in broadband penetration,

148
00:08:09,045 --> 00:08:12,017
now to, depending on the scale,

149
00:08:12,017 --> 00:08:15,049
number 18, 19, or 28.

150
00:08:15,049 --> 00:08:19,022
And that change is because of policies that

151
00:08:19,022 --> 00:08:21,094
effectively block competition

152
00:08:21,094 --> 00:08:25,040
for broadband providers.

153
00:08:25,040 --> 00:08:28,056
Their answer, these broadband providers brought to

154
00:08:28,056 --> 00:08:30,083
our government, and got our government to impose

155
00:08:30,083 --> 00:08:36,006
actually benefited them and destroyed the incentives

156
00:08:36,006 --> 00:08:38,040
for them to compete in a way that would drive

157
00:08:38,040 --> 00:08:41,084
broadband penetration.

158
00:08:41,084 --> 00:08:44,002
I think in light of these examples,

159
00:08:44,002 --> 00:08:47,065
it is completely fair to be skeptical

160
00:08:47,069 --> 00:08:50,078
of the anwer modern democratic governments give.

161
00:08:50,091 --> 00:08:53,045
We should say to modern democratic government,

162
00:08:53,049 --> 00:08:59,088
you need to beware of incumbents bearing policy fixes.

163
00:08:59,088 --> 00:09:02,020
Because their job, the job of the incumbents,

164
00:09:02,020 --> 00:09:06,066
is not the same as your job, the job of the public policy maker.

165
00:09:06,066 --> 00:09:10,033
Their job is profit for them.

166
00:09:10,033 --> 00:09:12,026
Your job is the public good.

167
00:09:12,026 --> 00:09:15,065
And it is completely fair, for us to say,

168
00:09:15,065 --> 00:09:19,050
that until this addiction is solved, we should

169
00:09:19,050 --> 00:09:23,015
insist on minimalism in what government does.

170
00:09:23,015 --> 00:09:26,014
The kind of minimalism Jeff Jarvis spoke off when he

171
00:09:26,014 --> 00:09:28,054
spoke of "do no harm".

172
00:09:28,054 --> 00:09:32,025
An internet that embraces principles of open and free

173
00:09:32,025 --> 00:09:35,094
access, a neutral network to guarantee

174
00:09:35,094 --> 00:09:41,019
this open access, to protect the outsider.

175
00:09:41,019 --> 00:09:44,065
But here is the one think we know about this meeting,

176
00:09:44,065 --> 00:09:48,083
and its relationship to the future of the internet.

177
00:09:48,083 --> 00:09:50,092
The future of the internet is not Twitter,

178
00:09:50,092 --> 00:09:53,078
it is not Facebook, it is not Google,

179
00:09:53,078 --> 00:09:57,012
it is not even Rupert Murdoch.

180
00:09:57,012 --> 00:10:01,035
The future of the internet is not here.

181
00:10:01,035 --> 00:10:05,062
It wasn't invited, it does not even know how to be invited,

182
00:10:05,062 --> 00:10:09,063
because it doesn't yet focus on policies and fora like this.

183
00:10:09,063 --> 00:10:14,047
The least we can do is to preserve the architecture

184
00:10:14,047 --> 00:10:17,068
of this network that protects this future

185
00:10:17,079 --> 00:10:19,041
that is not here.

186
00:10:19,056 --> 00:10:21,099
Thank you very much.