Matt is clearly right that geek activists are lousy at political organizing, and Internet utopianism may lull some of us into a false sense of security. But I think that, if anything, Benkler’s writing demonstrates the opposite tendency: his pronouncements tend toward the apocalyptic. For example, he says:
I think there are certain well-defined threats to this model. If we end up with a proprietary communications platform, such as the one that the FCC’s spectrum and broadband policies are aiming to achieve; and on that platform we will have proprietary, closed platforms like the iPhone, then much of the promise of the networked environment will be lost.
Now, I’ve written before that I think Benkler overhypes the potential of a spectrum commons. I won’t belabor that point, but I think his comments about the iPhone are particularly interesting. It’s certainly true that advocates for open standards like Benkler (and me) have much to criticize in the iPhone. But it’s a mistake to view the iPhone as a step backwards for open networks without looking at the broader context.
In the first place, Apple’s attempts to lock down the iPhone have sparked an enormous customer backlash and that backlash may have spurred Apple to release an SDK for the phone. I would bet money that the iPhone will be a de facto open platform within five years, with a thriving community of third-party developers.
But more importantly, we have to remember what the iPhone replaced. Steve Jobs demands tight control over products he launches, and to get that he had to stare down AT&T, which typically calls the shots when it comes to cell phones used with its networks. The iPhone has become such a hit that Jobs now almost certainly has the upper hand: if AT&T tries to cripple the iPhone, Jobs can and will walk away from the table and sign a contract with another provider. That means that the Big Four’s much-lamented stranglehold over users’ cell phone experience has slipped a notch.
And the arrangement is likely to be a template for others in the coming years. Verizon, Sprint, and T-Mobile want an answer to the iPhone, and if a company with an appropriate cachet (say, Google or Sony) comes knocking, they’re likely to be more amenable to giving up control than they were six months ago. And once there are a few non-crippled devices on the market, it’ll be much harder to sell anyone a crippled device.
This is, in other words, a one-way ratchet in the right direction. Every time a handset maker wrings increased openness out of one wireless carrier, and thereby produces a handset that’s superior to what’s already on the market, that device will set a new baseline for the capabilities a phone should have. And the other carriers will have little choice but to follow suit by allowing similar features on their own networks. It may take a long time, but de facto open networks will get here eventually.
Of course, alarmism about corporate control of networks isn’t new. Larry Lessig sounded an almost identical alarm a decade ago, warning that if Washington doesn’t take action quickly, big corporations will seize control of the Internet and rob it of its decentralized, independent character. I think it’s safe to say he was wrong, at least so far. The ‘net is indisputably more open, innovative, and competitive than it was a decade ago. So I think it’s worth taking Benkler’s predictions of an Internet apocalypse with a grain of salt. Yes, it’s important to be vigilant, especially when we’re talking about companies as deeply wedded to rent-seeking as AT&T and Verizon. But generally speaking, things are going pretty well, and there’s every reason to think that trend will continue.
None of which is to say there aren’t things for geeks to be upset about. But we also should keep those concerns in perspective. Progress has continued at a healthy clip despite the best efforts of entrenched interests to slow it down. We should certainly be pushing to remove the barriers that are preventing progress from happening even more rapidly. But we also shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that things are basically moving in the right direction.
The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.