Help Create An 'Innovation Agenda' You Wish Politicians Would Support
from the make-a-statement dept
New businesses are the key to job creation and economic growth, and the Internet is one of the most fertile platforms for new businesses ever established.
We believe deeply in the value of decentralized, emergent, bottom-up innovation, and we want to shape public policies that will allow it to flourish.
From there, we have a list of twelve topics that we think are important — but we want your input. So we’ve posted this same thing both here and over at our Step 2 discussion platform. Over at Step 2, we’ve also posted those initial twelve topics, with each one as a separate comment on the original post, so you can vote them up and down. If you want to really participate, please head on over to Step 2, where you can do three separate things (and, yes, your Techdirt login works there too):
- Suggest your own topics that should be part of an innovation agenda by responding to the main post.
- Vote on existing topics to show which ones are more important… and which ones are less important.
- Comment on the existing topics to provide feedback or suggest ways to improve them.
Please help us shape a comprehensive Innovation Agenda for 2012. Engine Advocacy is working closely with the internet community and helping give them a voice in DC, and this is one way to take part, as your suggestions may help shape what politicians are hearing.
Filed Under: bandwidth, bottom up, copyright, decentralized, entrepreneurship, free speech, innovation, innovation agenda, patents, privacy, spectrum
Comments on “Help Create An 'Innovation Agenda' You Wish Politicians Would Support”
You make it sound as if the internet is the most important thing ever for job growth, the “engine of our economy” so to speak.
This is merely the converse, in my opinion, of what is being said by those who hew to the position that IP is the “engine of our economy”.
I submit that both are gross overstatements. The internet helps facilitate communications. IP helps facilitate the development and provisioning of goods and services. Each helps, but they are hardly job creating panaceas. They are but tools.
You make it sound as if the internet is the most important thing ever for job growth, the “engine of our economy” so to speak.
This is merely the converse, in my opinion, of what is being said by those who hew to the position that IP is the “engine of our economy”.
I submit that both are gross overstatements. The internet helps facilitate communications. IP helps facilitate the development and provisioning of goods and services. Each helps, but they are hardly job creating panaceas. They are but tools.
Re:
“The internet helps facilitate communications.”
Undoubtedly.
“IP helps facilitate the development and provisioning of goods and services.”
Prove it.
Re:
Each helps, but they are hardly job creating panaceas. They are but tools.
I don’t think anyone has claimed otherwise. However, it has been claimed that the internet has been key for more job creation than the entertainment sector.
Re:
You make it sound as if the internet is the most important thing ever for job growth, the “engine of our economy” so to speak.
Not me. McKinsey: http://www.mckinsey.com/Insights/MGI/Research/Technology_and_Innovation/Internet_matters Perhaps the most trusted research firm out there.
I submit that both are gross overstatements. The internet helps facilitate communications. IP helps facilitate the development and provisioning of goods and services. Each helps, but they are hardly job creating panaceas. They are but tools.
Pretending that two are equal is laughable and clueless. You’re wrong.
having both this and a similar project on Reddit can only be good. however, apart from getting the politicians ‘clued in’ more about the internet and the massive number of opportunities it provides, the much more difficult task of getting them to realise that there is potentially more revenue to be made (and therefore more for the economy) from the internet than from the entertainment industries is going to prove almost impossible. after all, the internet doesn’t give ‘incentives’ to those politicians, does it?
Re:
TEll them that eacvh time a film is made by the Big Three, a job is killed on the Internet.
Re:
Your gratuitous “laughable”, “clueless”, and “wrong” to the expression of an individual opinion is disappointing.
A comment made in good faith deserves more than an impertinent response.
Re:
Your gratuitous “gratuitous”, “individual”, “opinion”, and “disappointing” to the expression of an individual is disappointing.
A comment made in good faith deserves more than an impertinent response.
Re:
The thing is, however, that some people have come here and argued that the tech industries would be nothing without Hollywood, when in truth, Hollywood wouldn’t even exist if it weren’t for what were seen as excessive IP laws in Edison’s time.
Moreover, the Internet has the capacity to make society post-scarcity in its dealings with IP, and that positively terrifies the big players in media.
You're Missing The Point
The goals of politicians are not “promote innovation”.
Their goals are “Bailouts and subsidies for our supporters. Eliminate competition through crushing regulations, which act as a regressive tax.”
Re:
Well, they’ve killed all the math teachers. It’s only a matter of time before jobs are killed.
You're Missing The Point
That may be true, but that’s quickly changing. Now that the entire world is filled in on crony capitalism, the same rules that worked in the 20th century aren’t going to work effectively anymore. I believe that in the next few years, you’re going to see a huge change in politics that are facilitated by the internet. Politicians listening to what the people are saying about legislation. People actually having a voice. And corporate shilling is going to be reduced severely. It’s already occurring. I just don’t think it’s hit critical mass quite yet.
Re:
Quite the contrary. It is a well-recognized symbiotic relationship, with hardware and software manufacturers creating tools, and “Hollywood” using those tools creatively.
While not receiving the high profile associated with “red carpet” attendees, the AMPAS each year honors and pays tribute to those “tool makers” who enable “Hollywood” to do what it does best.
Re:
Sure they use the tools, when they have failed to sue and/or legislate those tools into oblivion.
Hear that trolls/shills? It's McKinsey, not Masnick you should be attacking!
Not me. McKinsey: http://www.mckinsey.com/Insights/MGI/Research/Technology_and_Innovation/Internet_matters Perhaps the most trusted research firm out there.
From now on, anyone who asks for the “data” and “evidence” supporting the importance of the internet and job growth should take their debate up with McKinsey.
Or accuse McKinsey of being pirates and freetards. Whichever rocks your boat.
Re:
Why do they act as if they’re terrified and fight every technology tooth-and-nail?
The eejit’s point is an excellent one even leaving IP laws out of it. Without the technology industries, Hollywood would be nothing. Without Hollywood, the technology industries would be just fine.
Name them ?? please Masnick..
New businesses are the key to job creation and economic growth, and the Internet is one of the most fertile platforms for new businesses ever established.
Such as ????
how about you provide an actual example !
Name a new business that has significantly contributed to employment growth in the United States ?
You MUST be able to name at least ONE !, you should be able to easily list 50 such businesses.
Yet you dont do that ?? why is that, is it because you know from the very start what you are saying is a blantant lie ?
Do you actually have any idea at all about employment and employment growth in the US ?
could you possibly name some of the employment growth sectors in the US, with examples ?
we all know why you will NOT name any companies or provide actual examples to support your ‘reality’.. because you dont have any examples to show.
Not that, that stops you from writing from your delusional fantisy world..
Ofcourse, the usual idiots who allready believe you are the a living GOD, your diciples will hang of your every word.
most others will rightly see you for exactly what you are !!!
we seeyou as a person who is willing to say ANYTHING, to get yourself a few more page hits, and a bit more cash..
its funny and very sad at the same time.. but I guess once you have sold off any credability you might of ever had years ago, there is no turning back for you… and no future apart from what you are doing now !!!.
I hope you are enjoying your life time career highlight and peak !!!
I guess when you are old and retired, you will look back on these days and say to yourself, how good you were at helping people and improving your life and the lives of others because of your work !!!…. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..
I guess if you are devoid of any talent, skills, knowledge or ambition. Or any real life experience, making the peak of your life career on Google, seaching for well not FACTS that is for sure.
Searching for dirt, and without much talent, you cant even find that, so next best thing I guess, is for you to just MAKE IT UP !.
as you do..
Tell us Masnick, what have you actually ACHIEVED in your life ?
Re:
Without the technology industries, Hollywood would be nothing. Without Hollywood, the technology industries would be just fine.
So you think Hollywood IS THE entainment industry, guess what the entertainment industry has been around for longer than technology, ever heard of Broadway ?, Theater? Books, stories, fables, games, conversation, music and song (played by people with real instruments not computers).
DO you honestly believe that there was no entertainment before technology ?
Ever read a book ? ever had someone ‘tell you a story’ ? ever seen a street performance ?
Ever seen someone playing the piano or guitar, do you know what HISTORY means or is ?
No, the entertainment industry did just fine without technology, entertainment has embraced technology, but does not rely upon it…
Re:
No, the entertainment industry did just fine without technology, entertainment has embraced technology, but does not rely upon it…
You appear to have misunderstood what John Fenderson was saying, AC 19. He was not referring to entertainment in general, but rather to the specific industry built around it. Namely, Hollywood and the major music labels. There is, as you have pointed out, a very large difference between the two. The entertainment industry is not the same as entertainment in general.
In addition, while entertainment in general does exist independently of technology and always will in certain forms, Hollywood does not. The transmission of their content requires technology and would be impossible without it. Therefore, they do depend on technology for their existence.
Technology, however, does not possess the same need for them, and will continue to evolve with or without Hollywood and the major music labels. It should be noted that any content creator who wishes to reach a large audience in today’s world must rely on technology to do so, whether they are aligned with the legacy media companies or not.
Technology can be proven to be independent of the entertainment industry by the simple fact that technology is often designed for purposes other than entertainment. The entertainment industry, however, exists only for that one purpose. The industry’s singular focus on what it does is what makes it reliant on technology to deliver its content to a wide audience, or to even record it at all. Without technology, it could not do so. Technology’s multiple applications, however, are what allow it to be independent of the entertainment industry.
Re:
Hi, DH, how are you today, “good” thats great….
BTW: (Communications facilitate the internet !!!)
“The internet helps facilitate communications.”
Undoubtedly.
“IP helps facilitate the development and provisioning of goods and services.”
Prove it.
First, did you have any problems with communications prior to the internet ?
I remember the world before the “WEB” and we communicated JUST FINE !!.. amazing right.. I am sure you are amazed at that..
“IP helps facilitate the development and provisioning of goods and services.”
Prove it.
Ok, lets try this, you explain to us, how it is possible to develop a good, without knowledge ?
That is without the application of an interlect ?
Do you believe goods and services just appear out of smoke ? or that God created it ?
Is not Masnick trying to use his intelectual property (what he knows) to provide you with a ‘good or service’ ?
The ignorance displayed by some people on this site is breathtaking !
Re:
The Logician clarified my comment better than I could have. I was talking about Hollywood, not entertainment in general.
However, I do want to point out that some of your examples: theater, books, and music played on instruments all depend on technology.
Area of Interest for Energy Coal Air Fuel Cells
Back in 1990’s I was involved at SRI International with Molten Carbonate Coal Fuel Cells. The patents have long since expired with no commercialization. With all of our coal and the abundant Sodium Potassium and lithium carbonate available around the World. I would suggest that some form of money be put into this effort so that burning of coal and the required flue gas clean and poisioning of our atmosphere would be decreased. The ash is still a problem, but no sulfur, Mercury or other metals are ever put into the air, because there is no actual burning of the coal.
High Temperature Direct Coal Fuel Cell – Patent 7799472
Re:
let me guess Masnick ? you never did very well in debating club at school right ??
why can’t you support your claims with logic and reason ? why is it when you ‘have your turn’ to address a comment, you fall on your face ? are you hollow ? without substance ?
is your “best” is to say “you’re wrong” ?
why cant you even defend your own statements and claims ? do you lack that level of depth? are you hollow ?
Re:
let me guess Masnick ? you never did very well in debating club at school right ??
Let me guess, you were absent the day they covered capitalization and sentence structure in English 101, right?
Re:
Don’t take this the wrong way (or do), but if I were you, I wouldn’t be so quick to say “let me guess Masnick ? you never did very well in debating club at school right ??”
Why? Because, one could just as easily, and with your own rants as perfect testimony to the fact, ask or better said point out that YOU obviously didn’t do that well in English class in school. Given your lack of capitalization, lack of proper punctuation, and complete disregard for any of the other things that make up proper use and mastery of the written word.
Is your “best” to make snide comments and expect quick responses to all four post, each of which when posted causes the death of English teacher somewhere in the world?
I mean geez man. I look at what you write and my mind starts reeling as well as correcting all the misspellings, all the places where some of your disjointed sentences could’ve been put together to form proper paragraphs (and dare I say, nearly, cohesive arguments/points), etc.
Do us a favor, before you point out the flaws in others, maybe you should be sure to acknowledge and correct some of your own. That or at the very least get someone to proofread and edit your post before hitting “Submit”.
Name them ?? please Masnick..
I somewhat reluctantly respond with an example from XKCD:
http://xkcd.com/399/
Re:
Hahahahaha
Re:
The difference is I have not put myself up as an expert in english, or in writing. If you have trouble working out what I am trying to say, that is your problem.. Masnick on the other hand puts himself up as an expert on these subjects, except when questioned on his expertise, he falls in a heap.
The best he seems to be able to come up with, (with all his expertise) is “You’re wrong” !!!..
I guess, this is what you would call a “deflection”, if you cannot think of a reasonable response attack the person. or say “You’re wrong” !!!!.
If you dont like what I write, then dont fucking read it !.
Certainly dont bother to respond to it, oh you didn’t, that’s right, you have no argument, so attack the person..
oh well, if all you can be critical of is my english and grammer, that shows I must be saying something right. 😀
Thanks for not embarrasing yourselves by trying to make a point !
Name them ?? please Masnick..
I wonder if you even understand what people are talking about here ?
No wonder you were reluctant, how does that ‘example’ relate to the issues being discussed here ?
You're Missing The Point
The goal of a politician is to remain a politician, everything after that goal is achieved is cream on the top.
Hear that trolls/shills? It's McKinsey, not Masnick you should be attacking!
On average, the Internet contributes 3.4 percent to GDP in the 13 countries covered by the research
umm, 3.4% kinda sucks, as a percentage of GDP !
Most of the economic value created by the Internet falls outside of the technology sector, with 75 percent of the benefits captured by companies in more traditional industries.
and look at that, your ‘perfect’ source, diractly contradicts what masnick would have you believe, that it is “all about the technology”, except when it is not.
so 25% of 3.4% GDP grown can be attributed to ‘internet technology’.
I certainly is not in the ballpark of “major growth” or the “majority of new jobs” or new busineses employing people.
Perhaps you need to study your own research, they give you all the information, right there, give you a flashlight and a map, and you still cant find it… !
I can’t believe how you people are falling into a lame duck argument with the anon troll regarding technology vs IP content.
If copyright/IP were to disappear tomorrow, nobody would care except for the few greedy corps that want to monopolize all content. Conversely, if the internet were to disappear tomorrow, it would disrupt everything, from commerce to economy, communication to media …you name it.
AC, tell me, in what way is copyright/IP beneficial for society? When it’s used as a beating stick to punish children, old gradmothers and dead people with huge lawsuits? When it’s used as justification for mass censorship? When corps are suing other corps into the ground, making people lose jobs/income, all because some stupid idea somebody came up with (or claimed to…) that needed to be protected at all costs? When a company sues another over the use of a certain shade of color? Seriously, a COLOR. Since when did everything God create become the sole property of a few rich people?
Re:
First, did you have any problems with communications prior to the internet ?
No, not with people I had been introduced to and given a method of contacting. Now I can do worldwide searches, find resources like this opinion site and communicate with people I don’t even know…
how it is possible to develop a good, without knowledge ?
You can’t of course, but you already knew that. Just as importantly though, you can’t develop a good if you lock the knowledge away from everyone. The less restrictive you are with that knowledge, the more that can be done with it.
Name them ?? please Masnick..
So after asking a question that you KNOW can’t be answered to your satisfaction, you go off on someone that understands the situation just fine.
No-one here needs to point to a company that ‘significantly contributed to employment growth in the United States’, when they can simply point to all of those small individual business that do their business on the Internet every day and that have an audience simply because there is an Internet.
Rather than attempt to tear down your own strawman, why not try doing something more constructive and come up with your own suggestion of what should be done instead. Right now, after having ready your posts on this page, you aren’t saying anything that would make anyone want to continue to read what you write.
Hear that trolls/shills? It's McKinsey, not Masnick you should be attacking!
Run the numbers on 25% of 3.4% on ~20 trillion dollars (low ball of the GDP of the 13 countries). Then tell me how much all of big content makes a year …
To explain it simply, every year the growth in GDP, based on the internet, is larger that all of big content.
Re:
I do not recall them fighting digital projectors tooth and nail, nor do I recall the same for many newly developed visual effects, sound systems, cameras, etc., etc., etc.
These are all tools, and as such are improvements that are being used for the production and presentation of new works.
Litigation by them has been limited to but a small subset of technical achievements.
Re:
Well, not a small subset. They fight anything that has to do with data storage & transmission. Player pianos, TV, audio cassettes, VCRs, internet, etc.
Hear that trolls/shills? It's McKinsey, not Masnick you should be attacking!
Run the numbers on 25% of 3.4% on ~20 trillion dollars (low ball of the GDP of the 13 countries). Then tell me how much all of big content makes a year …
Can’t you freak’in read ?? it’s NOT LOW BALL of the GDP of the 13 countries…. !!!! idiot..
READ IT..
ON AVERAGE
Thats average, not lowest, but nice try,
Hear that trolls/shills? It's McKinsey, not Masnick you should be attacking!
oh and “big content” would be considered a part of the 75% of TRADITIONAL industries, not the 25% of technology.
$20 Trillion dollars, where did that number come from ?? your imagination ? You’re not real bright are you !!
Name them ?? please Masnick..
http://www.mckinsey.com/Insights/MGI/Research/Technology_and_Innovation/Internet_matters
SO if you care to get some real facts, instead of just opinion, read this report. 75% of all businesses that use the internet, are TRADITIONAL (non-internet based) companies, leaving 25% of internet only businesses, and the internet contributes 3.4% on average (of 13 countries, including the US), so it is 3.4% of the 25%.
And you cannot see how such LOW figures contradict your ‘argument’, and shoots it down in flames..
Oh well, at least you tried to excuse Masnick from actually providing examples to support his claims, no one ever expected Masnick to give examples, because he HAS NONE !
neither do you, we’ll fair enough, if you guys dont have a clue about the internet, or the law, or business, then you really dont have a clue about anything..
But if stupidity is how you keep happy, (after all it’s easier than thinking), good for you, after all it’s the American way..
Re:
wow, and hollywood existed before the internet !..
how do you explain that ?
Re:
most things depend on technology, from the original stone tools of early man, they did not and DO NOT depend on the internet.
I am quite sure cavemen were not able to google how to make a stone axe, and hollywood uses technology, (as everyone does), that has NOTHING to do with the internet.
you’re world view is very very warped, you do not seem to be able to understand the most basic of concepts do you ?
If hollywood relied on the internet, it would not exist without it, but it DID exist well before the internet, and before ‘internet’ technology.
it uses technology just like everyone else uses it, but that technology is not BECAUSE the internet exists !
Hollywood did VERY WELL, before the internet was even thought of !
Hollywood did not, and could not rely on internet technologies when they made the massive hit movie “star wars”.
But it did just fine, so how can you justify your ‘argument’ or ‘logic’ if the facts and reality contradict you..
So until you can align yourself to some reality, you would be better off not saying anything.. you’re just making it worse for yourselves..
you trying to present stupid arguments, that any idiot or moron, can work out how you’re argument makes no possible sense.. You just make yourself look very stupid, and unthinking.. but I guess your ‘ok’ with that.
Re:
They dont fight the technology at all, they fight the people who abuse that technology that conduct criminal activities with it.
They also attacked illegal VCR tape recording, it’s not the technology, it is the people who abuse a technology to commit a crime.
If you shoot someone, they dont arrest the gun, they arrest you for using the technology of a gun to commit a crime.
I know, take your time, it is a bit hard for yo’all to understand….
If copyright/IP were to disappear tomorrow, nobody would care except for the few greedy corps that want to monopolize all content.
ok, face it guy, YOU LOST THIS ONE!
Thankyou Masnick for not trying to provide any examples, or to justify your ‘adjenda’.
It’s not time for you to write this off, as another ‘swing and miss’.
Maybe next time, you will have more luck, but with any facts, or supporting proof, all you can do is rant, rave and build an alternative reality..
Re:
Creating and culture existed before Hollywood, and was doing fine before Hollywood.
How do you explain that?
Name them ?? please Masnick..
Low figures? Are we reading the same report here?
GDP of the world in 2010 = approx $63 trillion.
Taking the 70% generated by the 13 countries in the report = approx $44.1 trillion
3.4% of that = approx $1.5 trillion.
Even using your 25% figure for Internet only businesses, then that makes them directly responsible for approx $375 billion.
Of course you can’t just use that 25%, as the other 75% you dismiss IS affected by the existence of the Internet and would be much lower without it. No-one can say how much it actually contributes to those businesses but that doesn’t mean you can just write it off either.
Then there’s the fact that this is a growing figure – 21% in the last 5 years – you ignore that too. There is literally no other sector of commerce in the world that provides such growth rates.
So anyway, there are your figures – all there in the report you claim to have read.
Regards,
Not an American 😉