[ Thanks to Kelly
McNeill for this link. ]
“Realistically, nobody can say for sure what form of software
regulation is best. The regulatory entire spectrum, from the
current “Wild West” model to a utility-company model of regulated
monopoly, is subject to drawbacks or risks. The purpose of this
article is not to present an idealistic model for business
regulation. Instead, I want to point out some little-known facts
that expose the spin-doctors on the Microsoft side as either
ignorant or willfully deceptive. It is important for people to know
the facts, the realities, and to base their decisions on such
realities instead of mumbo-jumbo from the wealthy and influential
lobbyists on either side of the issue.”
“One of the best ways to find out if a certain model of
regulation or economic structure would be effective is to examine
the historical record. While we cannot be certain that
previous examples will always apply in a particular modern-day
case, we can at least dispel some of the FUD and the complaints
about “unknown risks”. For example, we can be sure that an outright
ban of liquor does not work, because we have seen the effects of
government-mandated Prohibition in the U.S. We cannot generalize
this example to claim that Mafia-style software distributors would
engage in running gun battles in the street during a “software
Prohibition”, because Internet distribution would be a swift path
around any distribution bottlenecks. But we can see that people
will find a way to get what they want if somebody makes it
available — provided there are no secret “hooks” to prevent what
they get from working. Liquor is liquor, but software can be
anything the manufacturer wants it to be.”
“The question we should ask, then, is “What prior examples of
government software regulation exist already?” Also, we should ask
“How effective is this regulatory regime, and why?” Finally, we
need to examine the question “How applicable is this example to the
current and expected future software marketplace?”