Saving the Information Commons a New Public Intere S T Agenda in Digital Media
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Saving the Information Commons A New Public Intere s t Agenda in Digital Media By David Bollier and Tim Watts NEW AMERICA FOUNDA T I O N PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE Saving the Information Commons A Public Intere s t Agenda in Digital Media By David Bollier and Tim Watts Washington, DC Ack n owl e d g m e n t s This report required the support and collaboration of many people. It is our pleasure to acknowledge their generous advice, encouragement, financial support and friendship. Recognizing the value of the “information commons” as a new paradigm in public policy, the Ford Foundation generously supported New America Foundation’s Public Assets Program, which was the incubator for this report. We are grateful to Gigi Sohn for helping us develop this new line of analysis and advocacy. We also wish to thank The Open Society Institute for its important support of this work at the New America Foundation, and the Center for the Public Domain for its valuable role in helping Public Knowledge in this area. Within the New America Foundation, Michael Calabrese was an attentive, helpful colleague, pointing us to useful literature and knowledgeable experts. A special thanks to him for improv- ing the rigor of this report. We are also grateful to Steve Clemons and Ted Halstead of the New America Foundation for their role in launching the Information Commons Project. Our research and writing of this report owes a great deal to a network of friends and allies in diverse realms. For their expert advice, we would like to thank Yochai Benkler, Jeff Chester, Rob Courtney, Henry Geller, Lawrence Grossman, Reed Hundt, Benn Kobb, David Lange, Jessica Litman, Eben Moglen, John Morris, Laurie Racine and Carrie Russell. Tina Sherman and Hannah Fischer both provided careful and thorough oversight of this report’s production. For his smart graphic design, we again thank Donald Norwood of 5 on your eye design. David Bollier Amherst, Massachusetts Tim Watts Melbourne, Australia May 2002 About the Au th o rs David Bollier is Director of the Information Commons Project at the New America Founda- tion, a Senior Fellow at the Norman Lear Center at the USC Annenberg School for Commu- nication, an advisor to Norman Lear, and a strategic consultant to foundations, nonprofits and citizen groups. He is also co-founder of Public Knowledge, a public-interest advocacy organiza- tion dedicated to defending the commons of the Internet, science and culture. He is based in Amherst, Massachusetts, and can be reached at [email protected]. Tim Watts is the CEO of OzProspect, a nonpartisan policy think tank based in Melbourne, Australia (www.ozprospect.org). He is a regular contributor of commentary and analysis to BRW magazine, the Australian Financial Review, The Australianand The Boston Globe. He can be reached at [email protected]. ©2002 New America Foundation & Public Knowledge Contents Introduction . .1 I. The Rise of the Information Commons.. 7 A Place of Our Own: Online Libraries and Archi ve s. 10 The Inter n e t Commons as Online Collaboration.. 14 The Open Source Softwa r e Revol u t i o n.. 19 The Pee r- to - P eer Revolu t io n.. II . Sa ve the Inter n e t Commons: Requ i r e an Open, Accessible Infrastruc t u r e.. .2 5 The Fut u r e of Open Stan d a rd s. .. Ho t Zones for Inter n e t Stan d a r d Sett i n g.. 28 Pr o tecting Open Access to the Inter n e t.. 32 The Danger s of Media Concentration .. 35 II I . Pr otect the Public Domain: Limit The Copyright Monopoly.. .3 9 Ma k e it Easy to Put Wor ks into the Public Domain.. 41 Sh o r ten the Term of Copyr i g h t.. Af firm Broad Fair Use Rights for the Public.. .4 3 Roll Back the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. .4 6 Af firm Free Speech over Tra d e m a r k Law.. 47 Pr o m o te the General Public License in Softwa r e .. .4 9 Ex p l o r e GPL-l i k e Licenses in Other Media .. .5 0 IV .For tify the Information Commons: Ado p t Innovat i v e Policy Initiatives. 53 Earning a Fair Return on Our Airwaves.. 54 The Digital Opportunity Inves tment Trus t .. 57 The New Voices Initiative... The Open Spectrum Project.. .. .. Managing Government Information as If Citizens Matter ed .. .6 3 Conclusion: A Return to Fir st Principles .. 67 Reader Res o u rc e s. 71 Notes.. .. Introduction weeping changes in our nation’s communications infrastruc t u r e and markets over the past twenty years have radically changed the topography of the pub- Slic sphere and democratic culture. But the mental maps which many people use to conceive “the public interest” in communications hark back to circa 1975, a time when the traditional broadcast model dominated and there were only three co m m e r cial television networks, cable TV consisted of “community antennae” to reach rural areas and even the VCR had not yet been unleashed. In the 1970s, the public interest in broadcasting was about the Fairness Doctrine, general content guidelines and public television subsidies. Times have changed. Over the past generation, the Internet, the World Wid e Web, cable television, wireless and many other electronic technologies have dra- matically changed market struc t u r es and people’s use of communications media. By any absolute measure, the new technologies have yielded huge increases in the quantities of information and programming available to Americans. They have also given individual citizens a much greater ability to create and control content. The flows of information and entertainment, and people’s access to and control over it, are changing rapidly. Amidst the boom in telecommunications, the Internet and new television out- lets that dominated press attention over the past decade, relatively little attention has been paid to the fate of the public interest. Among the “old media”—broa d - casting and cable television—the entrep r eneurial zeal that gave birth to country music networks, science fiction networks and infomercial channels has not been noticeably directed towards the nation’s many civic, political, cultural, arti s t i c , 1 Introduction no n p r ofit and community needs. Notwith- the information commons—that now coexists standing innovations such as C-SPAN and alongside the mass media, which is chiefly new niche commercial networks, entire genres br oadcast and cable television. of public interest programming have virtu a l l y The result is a strangely bifurcated media di s a p p e a r ed from television. It is difficult to universe. On the one hand, there is televi- find thoughtful news and commentary, timely sion, which is doing far less to serve the pub- public affairs documentaries, high-quality edu- lic interest than a generation ago despite the cational prog r a m m i n g proliferation of channels. Broadcast news …t he Inter n e t has for children, original programs may be far more plentiful than local programming and twenty years ago, for example, but even vet- us h e r ed in a cultural and daring arts and cultural eran journalists question whether the market- pr ogramming. Public driven flood of tabloid fare and sensational- political peres t ro i k a of television, for its part, ism is serving the public or its own profes- has become far more sion well.1 The broadcast media, now more enormous prop o rt i o n s . co m m e r cial in orienta- consolidated than ever, considers it too tion, eschewing the con- expensive to give more than passing coverage Individuals now have the tr oversial, innovative to state election campaigns. and offbeat while quietly On the other hand, the Internet has grea t l y means to byp a s s in t r oducing more adver- expanded the spaces and modalities available tisements and cryp t o - for serving important non-market, public traditional publishers ma r k e t i n g . in t e r est needs. Thanks to the low-cost, flexible As two major commu- capabilities of the Internet, individuals with and become crea t o r s and nications media—televi- highly specific interests can now locate each sion and the Interne t — other and organize themselves as robust com- global publishers in the i r have collided, we are munities. Affinity groups and communities of faced with a diffi c u l t all varieties—largely exiled from the broa d c a s t own right. question: How are we to media since 1934—are now able to develop conceptualize the public their own distinctive voices in cyberspace. in t e r est in this brave new world? Instead of seller-s p o n s o r ed enterta i n m e n t If even a robust, highly diversified media and information moving from centralized marketplace cannot meet certain societal so u r ces to great masses of citizens in a one- needs, what new public policies need to be way flow (after first being vetted by corporate adopted? Can certain technologies, innova- ad v e r tisers), the Internet has ushered in a cul- tions in private law and voluntary social norms tural and political pe re s t ro i k a of enormous pro- do a better job than public policy alone? po r tions.