Reshared post from +Jeff Jarvis

Verizon makes its arguments against the FCC's net neutrality rules — and they are fraught with danger. 

Verizon sees the net as its newspaper and believes it has First Amendment rights to control what goes on the net. This is why +Doc Searls has taught me that it is dangerous to see the net as a medium. No, the net is a network and Verizon only offers access to it. 

But there's the next argument: Verizon says the net is its private property and so it makes a Fifth Amendment claim that imposing restrictions on its ability to impose restrictions on the net is like confiscating property without compensation. 

Danger, danger! 

[Added later:]

The First Amendment argument is absurd on its face. Does Verizon really want to be responsible for everything distributed on the net, including libel, theft, and other illegal behavior? I doubt it. Verizon is no publisher. 

The Fifth Amendment argument is a corner we've painted ourselves into by finding ourself dependent on a public good privately owned. But just as we make restrictions on private property — I can't build a gas station on my house; I have to give access to public utility workers — so must we here. 

We need a SOPA/PIPA/ACTA-level fight for net neutrality, for not allowing Verizon et al to mess with the net. We need a principle: First, do no harm. You might want to at least start here, by signing the Declaration of Internet Freedom. 

See: My post on a Hippocratic Oath for the net: http://buzzmachine.com/2011/05/23/a-hippocratic-oath-for-the-internet/ And the Declaration of Internet Freedom: http://www.internetdeclaration.org/freedom

Embedded Link

Verizon: net neutrality violates our free speech rights
Company argues FCC regulations run afoul of Fifth Amendment property rights too.

Google+: View post on Google+

Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.