Will Internet Freedom Be Preserved And Expanded In 2013?

The incumbents often seek special help from the government, claiming they want a marketplace from government intervention; but they don't get it. The role of the government is to address market failures, and to block cartels, monopolies, and anti-competitive forces that interfere with the effective operation of free enterprise. A legitimate function of the government is to defend the market against the forces interfering with its efficient function.

"If a provider wishes to slow consumers' Internet connections in order to discriminate against a provider of content, my view is that they should face the antitrust laws. Sen. Franken and I are working on legislation to do just that � to strengthen the antitrust laws in order to ensure that the major ISPs cannot use their market dominance to pick online winners and losers."

Here is what the freedom to compete in the marketplace means. First, it begins with access to the Internet. Internet Service Providers — wired or wireless — must be barred from practices that discriminate against specific content. The Open Internet order established by the FCC is a good start but it doesn't go far enough because, in reality, it is not comprehensive. Most of Las Vegas this week, for example, will access the Internet through their wireless connection, which is not fully subject to the FCC order.

A related concern is the affect of software patents on America's ability to innovate. Congress should begin a review — a cost-benefit analysis — of software patents' contribution to the economy. The acquisition of these patents appears less about deploying innovation and more about employing a legal arsenal. The patent system should not, as Julie Samuels at EFF says, operate as a tax on innovation, as it does now. How are you promoting innovation if you stand behind a law that enables a few lines of code to be patentable for 20 years? Software is different than a new invention. It is a building block — a new set of instructions — that should be continually built upon and improved.

The Internet is too important to our common interest to enable bits and bytes to be viewed only in terms of dollars and cents. It is time for legislation to establish disciplines on data caps that give innovators and entrepreneurs the opportunity that is a pillar of our nation's economy: the freedom to compete. Promoting this freedom begins with the Internet connection, but it must be rooted throughout the Internet ecosystem.

Let's address the goals of CISPA without creating a cyber-industrial complex that would produce an endless, losing, cat-and-mouse game in which nimble hackers win all the time. And let's make sure cyber security isn't used in a way that exposes the electronic communication of every American to government and corporate snoops.

But what chills the sharing of ideas and collaboration is the maximalist approach to copyrights and patents. Rights-holders are too eager to use their power to scare off challenges to the status quo, and this perpetuates stagnation. Indisputably, the protection of intellectual property is important. The balance between providing rights-holders a monopoly and promoting competition and innovation is just as important. It must be continually re-examined and reconsidered.