Lawmakers Miss the Mark on Technology

Since the early days of the Internet, we have been tempted to look at this technology as a "new place" where the everyday rules of reality don't apply. While those amazed with the potential of the Internet were busy coining terms like "cyberspace" to describe it, the Internet has never been more than a fancy communication device.

I cringe a little every time I hear "cyberspace" used to describe the Internet, as I'm sure everyone else would if I started referring to the telephone system as "tele-space" or the local FM radio station as existing in "radio-space." Senator Ted Stevens incited a collective sigh from the entire technology community with his now infamous "series of tubes" metaphor.

Our latest misadventure into technology law is the Protect-IP act, which hopes to solve the problem of freely downloadable songs and movies by going after any search engines that could be used to find them. This is equivalent to burning every phone book that might have a criminal's phone number in it. Even further, it allows the government to "break" any part of the Internet that a music or movie producer complains about. Any 13 year old kid is going to find a way around their "break" in about 5 minutes flat. When octo-genarian congressmen compete against the technology literate, it is best not to bet on the congressmen when the game actually is technology.

Why the misguided fumbling around in technology law? Perhaps it is time for our lawmakers to look up the word "analogy" in the dictionary. It is most certainly time to start treating the Internet like the communication system it is, rather than some mystical beast requiring a whole new set of rules. Applying this logic to a few examples of the technology debates making their way through the halls of congress show us that common sense can actually prevail.

Debate: Net Neutrality

We wouldn't accept our local phone company telling us that all calls are free to Walmart, but an extra fee, or an extra delay before the call is placed would be instituted to call Target.  Our Internet providers have been so busy selling us "unlimited access" that they now want to turn around and make up for their blunder by collecting ransom from the companies we "call" on the Internet.

Debate: Internet Gambling

We have laws that make it illegal to use a communication system to gamble without it being a government approved method. (i.e. lottery tickets)  Enforce them.

Debates: Online Bullying / Online Wiretapping / Online ETC

If all you have to do is tack "online" to the front of something and it sounds bad, I bet it sounds just as bad without "online" in it. If somebody figures out how to make a computer kill someone else remotely, they will be guilty of murder. Do we really need a new "online murder" law? If so, somebody should research how to use a turnip to convince elected officials to all retire on an island somewhere. We could tell them the island is "cyberspace" and make a reality show out of it.

To submit your questions to the author to be answered in a future article, simply ask in the comment-space or e-mail them directly to: patchblog@budsandbytes.com