WEBVTT 00:00:03.437 --> 00:00:05.921 So, I apologize that I am going to introduce these 00:00:05.921 --> 00:00:07.546 ideas so early in the morning, 00:00:07.546 --> 00:00:09.497 after such a late night last night. 00:00:09.497 --> 00:00:14.025 But I'll like you to think of an alcoholic. 00:00:14.025 --> 00:00:15.581 And I don't mean the kind of drop-dead 00:00:15.581 --> 00:00:16.834 drunken alcoholic, 00:00:16.834 --> 00:00:20.921 or somebody who is even recovering from AA. 00:00:20.921 --> 00:00:23.243 I am thinking just of the regular alcoholic 00:00:23.243 --> 00:00:30.790 who works hard to control the addiction he has. 00:00:30.790 --> 00:00:32.717 But this particular alcoholic, I want you to 00:00:32.717 --> 00:00:36.107 imagine that, in addition to the addiction to alcohol, 00:00:36.107 --> 00:00:39.545 he has a second addiction as well. 00:00:39.683 --> 00:00:43.630 Not the debilitating addiction that keeps him 00:00:43.630 --> 00:00:44.466 down all day. 00:00:44.466 --> 00:00:46.417 And not a recovered drug addict. 00:00:46.417 --> 00:00:48.089 But an addiction nonetheless 00:00:48.089 --> 00:00:51.270 that continues to pull him in another way, 00:00:51.270 --> 00:00:52.895 away from what he wants to do. 00:00:52.895 --> 00:00:59.095 A person with two addictions, pulling different ways, 00:00:59.095 --> 00:01:01.974 making him vulnerable, making him dangerous, 00:01:01.974 --> 00:01:04.830 as he is susceptible to the temptations of each. 00:01:04.830 --> 00:01:09.474 And the trick for this soul is to control 00:01:09.474 --> 00:01:14.536 and to regulate these addictions, to keep them under control. 00:01:14.536 --> 00:01:17.021 Now I give you this picture because 00:01:17.021 --> 00:01:23.963 I think it is a good picture of modern democratic government. 00:01:23.963 --> 00:01:26.007 Modern democratic government too, is pulled 00:01:26.007 --> 00:01:28.120 by these two separate kinds of addictions. 00:01:28.120 --> 00:01:31.254 Constantly pulled by craziness. 00:01:31.254 --> 00:01:35.736 Craziness to one side for the people, or at least wrongly, 00:01:35.736 --> 00:01:37.849 as the people push the government to do what 00:01:37.849 --> 00:01:40.357 is not in the public interest. 00:01:40.357 --> 00:01:41.773 Think of Peronism, 00:01:41.773 --> 00:01:44.954 or the kind of populism that drove the 00:01:44.954 --> 00:01:49.296 banking and housing bubble in the United States. 00:01:49.296 --> 00:01:52.385 Or in the other hand, an addiction to special interests, 00:01:52.385 --> 00:01:56.912 let's call them "incumbents", constantly tempting the government 00:01:56.912 --> 00:01:59.304 to do something crazy for public policy 00:01:59.304 --> 00:02:01.301 in the name of benefiting the incumbents. 00:02:01.301 --> 00:02:04.180 And here, in the United States at least, you can think about 00:02:04.180 --> 00:02:08.824 just about every major policy issue where this addiction 00:02:08.824 --> 00:02:10.578 has had its role. 00:02:10.578 --> 00:02:12.841 Each of these pulling constantly, 00:02:12.841 --> 00:02:17.950 constantly tempting, always the government is vulnerable. 00:02:17.950 --> 00:02:22.269 Always, as libertarians insist, it is dangerous 00:02:22.269 --> 00:02:25.287 because it can always be exploited 00:02:25.287 --> 00:02:30.372 by one of these two sources at least, 00:02:30.372 --> 00:02:35.133 the temptations of the incumbents. 00:02:35.133 --> 00:02:39.916 OK now, the Internet is a platform, 00:02:39.916 --> 00:02:41.518 it is an architecture, 00:02:41.518 --> 00:02:46.023 it is an architecture with consequences. 00:02:46.023 --> 00:02:48.623 It is an architecture that enables innovation, 00:02:48.623 --> 00:02:52.524 or at least enables a certain kind of innovation. 00:02:52.524 --> 00:02:56.448 Think of the history of innovation in the Internet. 00:02:56.448 --> 00:03:02.356 Netscape, started by a drop-out from undergraduate university. 00:03:02.439 --> 00:03:04.436 Hotmail, started by an Indian immigrant, sold to 00:03:04.436 --> 00:03:07.037 Microsoft for 400 million dollars. 00:03:07.037 --> 00:03:11.820 ICQ, started by an Israeli kid and then his father, who was here, 00:03:11.820 --> 00:03:14.212 selling it to AOL for 400 million dollars. 00:03:14.212 --> 00:03:17.184 Google, started by two Stanford dropouts. 00:03:17.184 --> 00:03:21.015 Napster, started by a dropout and someone who 00:03:21.015 --> 00:03:22.966 hadn't yet been able to be a dropout, 00:03:22.966 --> 00:03:24.916 sitting on this panel, here, today. 00:03:24.916 --> 00:03:28.028 Youtube, started by two Stanford students. 00:03:28.028 --> 00:03:35.992 Kazaa and Skype, started by kids from Denmark and Sweden. 00:03:35.992 --> 00:03:38.569 And then, of course, Facebook, and Twitter, started by kids. 00:03:38.569 --> 00:03:42.029 What unites all of these innovations? 00:03:42.029 --> 00:03:48.438 They were all done by kids, dropouts, and non-americans. 00:03:48.438 --> 00:03:50.388 Outsiders. 00:03:50.388 --> 00:03:54.754 Because this is what that architecture invited. 00:03:54.754 --> 00:03:58.701 It invited outsider innovation. 00:03:58.701 --> 00:04:05.597 Now, outsider innovation threatens the "incumbents". 00:04:05.597 --> 00:04:08.128 Skype threatens telephone companies. 00:04:08.128 --> 00:04:11.054 Youtube threatens television companies. 00:04:11.054 --> 00:04:13.423 Netflix threatens cable companies. 00:04:13.423 --> 00:04:16.743 Twitter threatens sanity - 00:04:16.743 --> 00:04:18.879 not that sanity was ever an incumbent. 00:04:18.879 --> 00:04:25.009 But then the threatened respond to this threat. 00:04:25.009 --> 00:04:30.582 By turning to the addict, modern democratic government, 00:04:30.582 --> 00:04:34.715 and using drug of choice (which in the United States at least 00:04:34.715 --> 00:04:37.896 is an endless amount of campaign cash), 00:04:37.896 --> 00:04:42.564 using that drug to secure the protection 00:04:42.564 --> 00:04:50.110 against these threats that the incumbent faces. 00:04:50.110 --> 00:04:54.452 Now this was the point that I think president Sarkozy missed yesterday, 00:04:54.452 --> 00:04:57.749 and the question that Jeff Jarvis raised when he suggested 00:04:57.749 --> 00:05:00.188 that the principle that should be carried to the G8 00:05:00.188 --> 00:05:03.856 is that the government "do no harm". 00:05:03.856 --> 00:05:05.691 President Sarkozy said, no, but we have important 00:05:05.691 --> 00:05:08.849 policy issues to resolve. But here is the point. 00:05:08.849 --> 00:05:13.260 We get that there are "hard policy" issues here. 00:05:13.260 --> 00:05:17.394 From copyright, to privacy to security to the problem of monopoly. We get it. 00:05:17.394 --> 00:05:22.502 The point is, is we don't trust the answers the 00:05:22.502 --> 00:05:24.360 government gives. 00:05:24.360 --> 00:05:27.564 And for good reasons we don't trust these answers, 00:05:27.564 --> 00:05:31.418 because on issue after issue, the answer that 00:05:31.418 --> 00:05:35.784 modern democratic government has given here, 00:05:35.784 --> 00:05:39.174 is an answer that happens to benefit 00:05:39.174 --> 00:05:41.240 the incumbents. 00:05:41.240 --> 00:05:45.536 And ignores an answer that might actually 00:05:45.536 --> 00:05:49.066 encourage more innovation. 00:05:49.066 --> 00:05:51.689 So think for example about the matter of copyright. 00:05:51.689 --> 00:05:55.242 Of course we need a system of copyright 00:05:55.242 --> 00:05:58.655 that guarantees that creators get compensated 00:05:58.655 --> 00:06:01.419 and secures their independence to create. 00:06:01.419 --> 00:06:05.389 No one serious denies that we have to have 00:06:05.389 --> 00:06:08.152 that system of protection. 00:06:08.152 --> 00:06:12.634 The question is not whether copyright should be protected. 00:06:12.634 --> 00:06:16.279 The question is how to protect copyright 00:06:16.279 --> 00:06:17.556 in a digital era. 00:06:17.556 --> 00:06:19.861 Whether the architecture of copyright, 00:06:19.907 --> 00:06:22.074 built for the XIX century, 00:06:22.182 --> 00:06:25.010 continues to make sense in the XXI. 00:06:25.010 --> 00:06:30.560 And what is the architecture that would make sense in the XXI? 00:06:30.560 --> 00:06:36.620 Now, is this the question the government is asking? 00:06:36.620 --> 00:06:38.640 I think the answer to that is no. 00:06:38.640 --> 00:06:42.913 Instead, what the government is proposing, 00:06:42.913 --> 00:06:45.521 around the world, specially here, 00:06:45.613 --> 00:06:47.975 and I apologize to my colleagues from France, 00:06:47.975 --> 00:06:49.809 but this is a technical legal term. 00:06:49.809 --> 00:06:54.639 The proposal suggested here is a "brain-dead" 00:06:54.639 --> 00:07:00.991 3-strikes proposal that happens to benefit incumbents. 00:07:01.114 --> 00:07:05.514 Ignoring the potential of innovation that could come from 00:07:05.622 --> 00:07:07.990 a new architecture for securing copyright. 00:07:07.990 --> 00:07:11.427 And you don't have to take my view for this. 00:07:11.427 --> 00:07:14.515 The recent report from the conservative government in Britain, 00:07:14.515 --> 00:07:17.557 the Hargreaves report, says of copyright: 00:07:17.557 --> 00:07:20.204 "Could it be true that laws designed more than three centuries 00:07:20.204 --> 00:07:23.617 ago with the express purpose of creating economic 00:07:23.617 --> 00:07:25.196 incentives for innovation, 00:07:25.196 --> 00:07:27.866 by protecting creators' rights 00:07:27.866 --> 00:07:31.326 are today obstructing innovation and economic growth?" 00:07:31.326 --> 00:07:33.509 The short answer is: "yes". 00:07:33.509 --> 00:07:37.921 "In the case of copyright policy, there is no doubt 00:07:37.921 --> 00:07:40.266 that the persuasive powers of celebrities and 00:07:40.266 --> 00:07:42.193 important UK creative companies 00:07:42.193 --> 00:07:44.817 have distorted policy outcomes." 00:07:44.817 --> 00:07:48.370 And not just, I suggest, in the UK. 00:07:48.370 --> 00:07:50.808 Think about the question of broadband policy. 00:07:50.808 --> 00:07:53.478 Europe, has actually been quite successful, 00:07:53.478 --> 00:07:57.100 in pushing competition in broadband, 00:07:57.100 --> 00:07:59.887 and therefore pushing broadband growth. 00:07:59.887 --> 00:08:05.669 The US has been a dismal failure in this respect. 00:08:05.669 --> 00:08:09.453 As we watch the US going from number 1 in broadband penetration, 00:08:09.453 --> 00:08:12.170 now to, depending on the scale, 00:08:12.170 --> 00:08:15.491 number 18, 19, or 28. 00:08:15.491 --> 00:08:19.229 And that change is because of policies that 00:08:19.229 --> 00:08:21.946 effectively block competition 00:08:21.946 --> 00:08:25.406 for broadband providers. 00:08:25.406 --> 00:08:28.563 Their answer, these broadband providers brought to 00:08:28.563 --> 00:08:30.839 our government, and got our government to impose 00:08:30.839 --> 00:08:36.063 actually benefited them and destroyed the incentives 00:08:36.063 --> 00:08:38.409 for them to compete in a way that would drive 00:08:38.409 --> 00:08:41.845 broadband penetration. 00:08:41.845 --> 00:08:44.028 I think in light of these examples, 00:08:44.028 --> 00:08:47.651 it is completely fair to be skeptical 00:08:47.697 --> 00:08:50.787 of the anwer modern democratic governments give. 00:08:50.910 --> 00:08:53.454 We should say to modern democratic government, 00:08:53.500 --> 00:08:59.887 you need to beware of incumbents bearing policy fixes. 00:08:59.887 --> 00:09:02.209 Because their job, the job of the incumbents, 00:09:02.209 --> 00:09:06.667 is not the same as your job, the job of the public policy maker. 00:09:06.667 --> 00:09:10.336 Their job is profit for them. 00:09:10.336 --> 00:09:12.263 Your job is the public good. 00:09:12.263 --> 00:09:15.654 And it is completely fair, for us to say, 00:09:15.654 --> 00:09:19.508 that until this addiction is solved, we should 00:09:19.508 --> 00:09:23.154 insist on minimalism in what government does. 00:09:23.154 --> 00:09:26.149 The kind of minimalism Jeff Jarvis spoke off when he 00:09:26.149 --> 00:09:28.541 spoke of "do no harm". 00:09:28.541 --> 00:09:32.256 An internet that embraces principles of open and free 00:09:32.256 --> 00:09:35.948 access, a neutral network to guarantee 00:09:35.948 --> 00:09:41.195 this open access, to protect the outsider. 00:09:41.195 --> 00:09:44.655 But here is the one think we know about this meeting, 00:09:44.655 --> 00:09:48.835 and its relationship to the future of the internet. 00:09:48.835 --> 00:09:50.925 The future of the internet is not Twitter, 00:09:50.925 --> 00:09:53.781 it is not Facebook, it is not Google, 00:09:53.781 --> 00:09:57.124 it is not even Rupert Murdoch. 00:09:57.124 --> 00:10:01.350 The future of the internet is not here. 00:10:01.350 --> 00:10:05.623 It wasn't invited, it does not even know how to be invited, 00:10:05.623 --> 00:10:09.640 because it doesn't yet focus on policies and fora like this. 00:10:09.640 --> 00:10:14.470 The least we can do is to preserve the architecture 00:10:14.470 --> 00:10:17.688 of this network that protects this future 00:10:17.799 --> 00:10:19.417 that is not here. 00:10:19.562 --> 00:10:21.996 Thank you very much.