Join Internet Startups In Telling The EU Not To Mess Up The Internet
from the do-it-now dept
Join us in telling EU regulators not to wreck the net.
Read & sign our open letter »
Just a few months ago, a top EU Commissioner flat out said that the EU should heavily regulate the top internet companies, mainly because they're based in the US. What they don't seem to understand is that the companies they're targeting -- mainly Google and Facebook -- are big enough to deal with almost any of the regulations that come up. They have teams of people who can figure out how to manage them, even if they may grumble about it all. But the companies who cannot deal with such regulations will be basically everyone else. All of the smaller companies and new startups.
In effect, by "regulating" the big internet companies in an attempt to punish them, the EU Commission might actually be entrenching them as the dominant players in the market: the exact opposite of what they think they're doing. Similarly, some of the discussed regulations would again seem to contradict the stated or implicit intentions of those politicians. For example, many in the EU complain about the "privacy" implications of large internet platforms that are monitoring what their users are doing. Yet, a key regulatory proposal being discussed is adding a "duty of care" to internet companies, that will require them to more actively monitor what their users are doing, to make sure that they're not doing anything "bad" that needs to be stopped/taken down/reported on.
Given our concerns that this process appears dangerously misguided, we crafted a letter to send to the EU Commission that is reviewing this issue, and have now opened it up so that you (and/or your companies) can sign it too. Please take a look and consider signing on, and telling the EU not to wreck the internet, in a short-sighted focus on trying to hinder big internet players.
Join us in telling EU regulators not to wreck the net.
Read & sign our open letter »
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: digital single market, don't wreck the net, eu, eu commission, internet regulations, startups
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Working as intended
Your observation that increased regulation will end up benefiting entrenched players is correct. What is incorrect, however, is to presume this is an unintended consequence of overzealous regulators who end up accomplishing the opposite of what they want.
This is regulatory capture, plain and simple, and it operates in every industry that is enslaved by bureaucrats: pharmaceutical, media/entertainment, basically every sector of the economy is led by a few large firms who have successfully campaigned for more regulation to drown their competition (one reason WalMart supported the Affordable Care Act). It's political entrepreneurship, rent-seeking, whatever you want to call it, and it undermines free trade and the free expression of ideas that we have come to appreciate so much on the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Working as intended
That's a valid point in many cases. However, having spoken to a variety of people involved in this consultation I *do not* think it's the case here. They legitimately think that they need to "stop" the big internet players, and basically just have not thought through the actual impact.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Working as intended
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
death and taxes
Much of the goal of one market style regulation is to make hiding in another country meaningless for taxation purposes.
It's why Google can do more than 5 billion of ads sales in the UK, but have all of it's ad sale business "handled" in Ireland, so they don't pay tax in the UK. They do pretty much the same thing in every other EU country.
Moves to control the internet in the end are moves to control income, jobs, and taxes. It may be one big EU, but the reality is that each country and each government wants to pull the blanket a little more to their side.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: death and taxes
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The US has the same issues with it's states and lower jurisdictions: if a transaction of any kind occurs within a jurisdictional boundry said jurisdiction wants some kind of sales or transaction tax. For many years even before the advent of internet purchasing mail & telephone orders were subject to sales taxes only in the jurisdiction(s) where the business was physically located. State has long argued that they're owed sales taxes on the premise that the customer would have bought anyway from a local business had mail &/or telephone ordering not existed. And yes that is not absolute; one might not buy at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
survey
[ link to this | view in chronology ]