If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It

The Internet has been an amazing success story. From the early days of ARPANET back in the 1980s to its ubiquitous presence today, the 'Net has enjoyed explosive growth and mind-boggling technological advances. So how can we improve on this? Why, through government regulation, of course.

White House official calls for broad regulations on Internet use

A White House official on Tuesday called for a broad and flexible regulatory framework for Internet use...

Daniel Weitzner, deputy chief technology officer in the White House’s Office of Science and Technology, spoke at the conservative Hudson Institute, where he pointed to President Obama’s Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights -- which the administration released in February -- as an example of policy Congress should pass into law to set parameters for use of the Web.

Left unexplained was exactly just why the hell congress needs to "set parameters for use of the Web."

“We think the flexibility of having a broad sense of principles but then tuning them to a particular business context is critical,” Weitzner said, “and provides . . . what we think the Internet needs.”

"...what we think the Internet needs.” If that doesn't scare the hell out of you then you must be a liberal, because as all liberals agree, the government knows better than anyone else what the Internet needs.

The Federal Trade Commission would act as a “safe harbor” to ensure industries were complying with the broad framework, Weitzner added. He also pointed to a set of proposals the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development laid out -- including global free flow of information and intellectual property protection -- as guidelines for broad Internet regulation.

As we all know, there is no "free flow of information" today. But with government regulation we can all rest assured that information won't be restricted, altered, or controlled ... right? And of course the FTC is totally immune to pressure and influence from large corporations and special interest groups. Plus what better model could there be for "broad Internet regulation" than the OECD (which is, incidentally, headquartered in Paris, France)?

The basis of these guidelines should fit three main principles, he said.

The first relates to the large scale of the Internet, which, according to the White House, indicates that regulatory structures cannot mimic those of other industries. The widespread nature of Internet development does not lend itself to “traditional command and control” guidelines, Weitzner argued.

The Internet "...does not lend itself to 'traditional command and control' guidelines."

Thank God.

Second, the Obama administration official said Internet public policy must “accommodate and encourage” the speed of the rapidly developing Internet medium.

Seems to me the Internet is "rapidly developing" on its own just fine, thank you very much. From where I sit it doesn't need any public policy assistance, other than perhaps a public policy of "hands off."

Finally, Weitzner emphasized the need for international cooperation in regulating the Web, comparing any company that does business on the Internet to a multinational corporation. He called for global standards to fill the void left by a lack of treaties.

"...international cooperation in regulating the Web." Why do these bozos always feel the need to regulate things? What's wrong with "leave well enough alone?"

Be afraid. Be very, very afraid...