Philosophy Questions: Lessigs Protection And Regulation Of Free Speech (Essay Sample)

Philosophy questions
Name:
Course:
Instructor:
Date:
Qn1. Lessig’s protection and regulation of free speech
Dr. Lessig asserts that the way free speech can be protected and regulated on the internet is entirely different from the way such speech would be restricted and protected in real space. In his analysis of free speech, therefore, he assumes the internet as a technological audience which in itself contains aspects of real space. On the other hand, he perceives the real space as the ideal world characterized by diverse cultures and personality. Free space, regardless of the fact that it ought to be boundless, will thus take different dimensions in the two reference frames as put across by Dr. Lessig. The significant differences in regulation of free speech in the two spaces will emanate from the Society norms and traditions, the audience composition and the expected effects of such free speech on the various recipients.
According to Lessig, there are norms and traditions in society. Each and every member of the community has thus a responsibility to ensure that their speeches are in line with the rules of the society. For instance, regardless of the context of the speech, certain things cannot be said in public, and that remains a regulating factor. On the contrary, there are no norms and traditions on the internet, and as a result, free speech on the web is controlled by statutory laws. Aspects of free speech such as inflammatory statements, incitement or vulgar language are legally prohibited. The importance of this difference in regulation is to ensure that people do not exploit the freedom in free speech to go against what is considered moral in society.
The aspect of the audience is also a regulatory measure in free speech. For the case of real space, the composition of the public determines the diction of any speaker. When addressing an audience in real space, one expects immediate reaction and judgment from the same audience. To keep an active audience, one can also choose to request their participation through question and answer sessions continuously. As a result, therefore, the live audience primarily regulates the use of language in real space. On the other hand, internet space addresses an imaginary audience, and as a result, free speech is restricted by the speaker’s morality. It is the responsibility of the speaker on the internet to ensure that the language used is acceptable by all audience classifications. The importance of such regulation is to ensure that everyone can access free speech without fear of giving wrong information to the right audience.
Qn 2.The utilitarian's justification of intellectual property rights, and the limits and cons of that justification
According to the Utilitarian theory of intellectual property, innovation and creation are of great benefit to society as they breed general happiness. However, such copyrights and patents will come at a considerably slow pace if they do not attract monetary incentives. Utilitarian, therefore, does not explicitly affirm that inventors, creators, and artists have natural regards on the reproduction of their work but assert that the whole essence of patent and copyrights lies in the benefits to the entire society. Copyrights and patents are thus meant to attract monetary profits to the artist or inventor which then serve as incentives to encourage more innovation and creativity. The society on the other hand benefits in such a way that t gets to access and enjoy the most creative content and artistic productions from motivated artists and inventors. This is in line with the constitution of the United States of America which states that the essence of the copyrights and patents is to "to promote the progress of science and useful arts."
The limit of the Utilitarian theory of patent rights is that it only applies to the initial production of the material in context. For instance, the copyrights and patents as stated in the Utilitarian theory will only apply to a person who comes up with an idea to write a book. In such a case, the author is entitled to all rights and profits that accrue from the sale, performance or production of that book. However, if any other person, upon agreeing with the initial author, reproduces an edition of the same book, then the rights move from the first author to the second author. Utilitarian justification of intellectual property, therefore, does not recognize the first author as the initial owner of the idea.
Qn 3.Tim Wu believes that the possibility of blocking can help explain why we should have net neutrality, but Christopher Yoo does not. Explain their reasons. Who is right and why?
In telecommunication, neutrality is defined as a concept that enables providers to provide broadband access to different clients at different rates at different costs, a concept that bred fast internet lines. On the other hand, blocking is thought of as any form of attempts by the broadband services providers to regulate what goes through their system for public consumption. Professor Wu is a strong antagonist of the entire idea of net neutrality since there are tendencies by service providers to incorporate blocking as in the course of trying to achieve net neutrality. According to Professor Wu, blocking is one way through which such service providers can either force their preferences on the end user or a prerogative approach to restricting the end user to access only what is deemed necessary according to the vendor. Professor Wu further argued that the user has systems that determine among all services, those that are worth his consumption and doesn’t require any third party to do the filtering. In fact, the major function of the provider is t...