[h2o-sausage] FW: Open Code, Open Societies

[Mary Lambert <lambert@cyber.law.harvard.edu>]

> >Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:10:27 -0400
> >Subject: Open Code, Open Societies
> >Sender: andrew_russell@Harvard.Edu
> >From: andrew_russell@Harvard.Edu
> >To: lessig@law.harvard.edu,
> >    nesson@law.harvard.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Greetings -
> >
> >Larry, I'm looking forward to your seminar today. I came to IT Policy
> with
> >a different perspective - I'm an historian and have strong spiritual
> (as
> >distinct from religious - see Ken Wilber) interests and beliefs. In
> fact
> >I'm leaving the Kennedy School in July to begin a History PhD at
> Boulder.
> >Most IT Policy folks seem to fall somewhere between technologists,
> lawyers,
> >technical or public policy types, and capitalists. Very few seem to
> be open
> >to more advanced thought that understands the Internet as another
> >development in human history (our friend JP Barlow fits here). There
> is
> >some philosophy being tossed around; but for the most part it is
> somewhat
> >shallow, and "Net-centric". By that I mean it's focus is 'how
> philosophy
> >can fit into the Net', rather than "how the net can fit into
> Philosophy".
> >
> >When I bumped into Charlie here in the Kennedy School a few months
> ago, and
> >he asked me if many people around here were talking about OSS or open
> code,
> >I didn't have the foggiest idea what he was talking about -- rather,
> I
> >didn't understand its relevance to public policy. Larry, I've read a
> few of
> >your papers, and noticed the priority the BCIS is putting on this
> issue.
> >Now things are making more sense.
> >
> >The end of your CFP99 paper and the end of the Open Code and Open
> Societies
> >paper (which might be the same papers, in essence) reminded me of a
> quote
> >from Emmanuel Levinas. I'm not sure if HLS is a big Levinas place or
> not
> >(difft universities seem to be hot and cold on him); but one of his
> >formulations is, to me, a close match for your conclusions. After
> making
> >this link, I realized the urgency and importance of your task.  This
> OSS
> >policy debate is a new forum for an age-old battle. I think it is the
> Big
> >Question of ethics.
> >
> >Levinas, from _Ethics and Infinity_, p. 80:
> >
> >"It is extremely important to know if society in the current sense of
> the
> >term is the result of a limitation of the principle that men are
> predators
> >of one another, or if to the contrary it results from the limitation
> of the
> >principle that we are *for* one another. Does the social, with its
> >institutions, universal forms and laws, result from limiting the
> >consequences of the war between men, or from limiting the infinity
> which
> >opens in the ethical relationship of man to man?" [emphasis = italics
> in
> >original]
> >
> >The question I see is, are we living in spite of one another, or for
> each
> >other?  I don't have the answer to that question in any abstract
> sense.
> >Nobody does.  But I can tell you this (and this may have occured to
> you
> >both years ago) - the direction of these policy debates will be able
> to
> >tell us a huge amount about ourselves, who we are, what we value, and
> how
> >we make our decisions.  Historians (like myself) will use this debate
> to
> >judge whether the development of the Internet reveals us to be
> predators or
> >brothers.  I'm going to Boulder to get my qualifications to fight on
> the
> >side of the good guys.
> >
> >Enjoy the sunshine,
> >
> >Andy
> 
> 
Larry Lessig's Essay for the Berkeley Journal of Law and Technology
(1999) 
The Limits in Open Code: Regulatory Standards and the Future of the Net 
-- with comments by Charles Nesson


> > <<lessig1.html>> 

    [ Part 2, Text/HTML (Name: "lessig1.html")  194 lines. ]
    [ Unable to print this part. ]