A law professor argues that laws and regulation will harm the internet, not help it—that it's up to the builders of the infrastructure and applications to build the internet faster than governments can crush it.

by Alex Goldman ISP-Planet Managing Editor [May 12, 2005]

As a law professor, Susan Crawford is better placed than most to warn of the dangers of allowing the government to make decisions instead of making decisions for ourselves. In her talk at the Freedom To Connect conference (full transcript on her blog), she warned everyone invoved in the internet that we all have to grow up (as ISPCON's Jon Price might say) and start making our own decisions.

She said we should not be eager to give away what we have, warning, "a digital bill of rights assumes that someone has the power to cut those rights off."

Psychology might explain our inability to seize control ourselves. She said that humans feel a need for control and planning, but the future, by its nature cannot be predicted (a little bit of Toffler in that comment, perhaps). She challenged attendees to look at the whole picture, to reach beyond their specializations (this is not easy).

She said government may take charge of the details, but the big picture must remain human and individualistic. "We need to tell our government: you're in charge of the atoms—you need to deal with food and chemicals and health care. But you are not in charge of our minds and our culture."

She said that politicians and old industries find interests in alignment with calls for regulation of access (telecoms), of content (media), and of applications (law enforcement).

She warned that people are also looking to the government for solutions to problems like porn and spyware, hoping to get a government mandate for filters. VoIP apps are running into the same regulatory twitch of dinosaur industries.

Finally, advocates of regulation are looking for security and certainty in a medium whose promise is change, disintermediation, and possibility.

She said she sees little value in government intervention beyond antitrust intervention to protect innovation.

Beyond that, it's up to us in the internet industry to build something magnificent before they can intervene to shut it down. She concluded:

"The hope should be that market and technological realities will overcome what's left of this regulatory apparatus, rendering most of this regulation beside the point. So you won't need to game the system—the regulators—taking advantage of regulatory arbitrage or spend years litigating. You'll be free."

— End