Donald N. Barclay III
Donald Barclay is a Resident Forum Blogger that discusses legal issues that arise in the world of modern computer technology.
Do we need a federal technology court? The tech industry is no doubt conforming to Moore’s law, if not exceeding its expectation. Moore’s law states that computer microprocessor power will be twice as powerful as it was two years ago. Those inside the tech industry are now questioning whether the US law can adapt to Moore’s prediction of exponential growth. Past precedent cannot be ignored, but are like cases really alike when one involves outdated technology and the other involves cutting edge concepts? The answer is not clear, and some courts seem to have biases against new technology based on past decisions.
A major techno-legal issue in 2014 comes to mind when contemplating this concern: American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. Now out of business, Aereo provided satellite broadcast TV over the Internet. Aereo produced a large number of coin-sized antennas, assigned individually to subscribers of Aereo’s service. The subscribers would then view their satellite feed over the Internet. Broadcasters took issue with Aereo’s satellite receivers farming their service, leading them to file suit that would eventually reach the Supreme Court. The tech world watched the case keenly, because the case was an indication of the Court’s ability to sift through outdated law in order to allow desired change. The Court found for ABC, ignoring Aereo’s argument that subscribers could have just as easily put their own satellite on their roof to get the broadcasts provided by Aereo’s service. The social propositions of those who understood the situation called for the Court to rule in Aereo’s favor, but broadcasters and cable companies called for a shutdown of this way for consumers to digest their content through a modern entertainment medium.
Similar to how our country has a court that oversees all patent issues, because of the technical nature of patent disputes, some are asking if there should be a court that presides over all other technological disputes. The argument is, if there needs to be specialists involved when bringing a new technology into existence shouldn’t there be specialists whom determine if it should be taken out of existence? Our system does not seem ready to answer this question, but one day it will have to be answered.
Though the tech boom started over ten years ago, it has not reached an explosive level yet. A lot of insiders in the tech industry feel that when the younger generations of Americans (that grew up with internet technology) reach an age of majority, the tech industry will take over America. It is at this point that we can expect to see techno-legal issues penetrate into mainstream discussion and be hot enough to be a part of a political party’s platform, which would be the vehicle to deliver necessary change to our system. It is a belief of many that if the Aereo case were tried thirty years into the future, it would have undoubtedly been found in Aereo’s favor, instead of ABC’s. TV content providers are acknowledging that consumers want more on demand content than scheduled TV programming; this is evident in ESPN and HBO announcing that they will provide their content to people separate from a cable subscriptions starting in 2015. ABC was afraid of the future and took advantage of a system that does not favor dynamicity. If one thinks our system adapts rapidly, look at the current battle over Internet regulation. President Obama is calling for the Internet to be classified as a public utility similar to how phone companies are regulated as public utilities. One could easily argue that it should have already been classified as a public utility since the Internet became used by over a billion people worldwide in 2005.
As technological legal issues gain more exposure and attention, we can expect to see more calls for change to how our system handles them. The challenge is this: learn about what is happening to tech and help those around you understand it. By educating our fellow citizens we can hope that no more companies like Aereo will go out of business due to our system’s lack of modernity. As public awareness and technological prowess increase, legislators will have to respond by appropriately updating the current legal system.
February 4, 2015