Cable rules? Broadcast rules? Network rules?
Someone asked me today what rules the FCC would apply to online video. My first thought was “rules? why have rules? what possible basis would there be for imposing any rules?”
But then I pulled myself together and attempted to provide a principled answer. I said, “They'll claim that certain rules are important social policies that need to be carried over into the digital age.” (This was the same principle used to back the Television Sans Frontieres initiative [pdf, 12/05 draft, now before the European Parliament and Council], and this is how the E911/CALEA debacle started. The next debacle will be the Universal Service discussion we'll have this year.)
The Europeans have said (overview here) we need to ensure “cultural diversity, the right to information, the protection of minors, and consumer protection.” Will the FCC come up with a similar list? If so, why?
The only reason to regulate here (cynicism) would be to protect the business models of existing broadcasters and the telcos/cablecos who want to become broadcasters and want to create barriers to entry to others. There is no scarcity or “public airwave” or “invasion into the home” or spectrum allocation rationale for regulation of online video.
This is a completely disruptive marketplace, if it's allowed to form. We'll have so much tagging and generating and sharing of online video that our heads will be spinning. Blogs? Who cares! We'll be sticking video clips together! Text, schmext. Take a look at the Participatory Culture Foundation. They're creating a free and open source internet TV platform, for creation and sharing of video.
Why would the FCC want to get involved here? There hasn't been a market failure — but there is a fabulous and enormous market about to reach the public consciousness.
So I'm hoping the question about regulation of IP video was just an idle one. I'm hoping we're not headed down another rocky road of rulemaking.