Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
10. That is a false claim in many cases
Fri Oct 26, 2012, 01:57 PM
Oct 2012

Recently the former head of the US Copyright office offered his opinion that under current law, any new tech that involves media be required to have explicit Congressional permission prior to sale. That is the kind of thinking we are seeing more of these days, and businesses use their politicians to protect a business model that has been usurped.

The example being flogged by the OP is not a typical case of disruptive technology. It is also a technology that will be in place in other cities, though maybe not by that vendor soon enough.

What new tech does is bring down business models and generally empowers people. Yet there are those who attempt to legislate against that kind of evolution. As long as individuals are not being harmed, I think such behavior is reasonably classified as Luddite.

I am being dismissive since that is all the OP and its citation merit.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»Travis Shrugged: The cree...»Reply #10