Translate

Search My Words

4/29/14

Laws against Aereo violate American Liberty, Equality & Rule of Law

MakeLifeBetter.me                                                                            Twitter: @PeaceEmpowers



My name is Caleb Ball and I am a content creator , founder of MakeLifeBetter.me , a website wherein I advocate better ways to treat each other, ways we can empower ourselves to be happy, and ways which we can live peacefully.

I also was in the US Army Reserves for 6 years.  I am a senior at Indiana University of Pennsylvania majoring in history, and I love the founding principles of our nation: liberty equality and the rule of law. 

Question:
Is it within the values of liberty, equality and fairness in rule of law to deny content creators like me, access to to content consumer, which I have been my entire life, via a 3rd party. 

I’d argue no. 

If you disagree with my viewpoint, then how is it within the values of liberty, equality and fairness in the rule of law?

          I argue that obstruction between content creators like me, and content consumers like all of us, would be a violation of American values as it violates each value we share.  It violates liberty as is desables our freedom to share the content we produce with the people whom desire it.  It obstructs equality, as this obstruction of freedom to share is not done equally.  The Cable companies are free to share their content with consumers whom would enjoy it, however the rest of us are not currently afforded the same freedom.  Of course, the cable companies do produce great content , perhaps better than what many of us could create together, yet their proficiency in content creation should not be reason to have laws which favor their company over others.  We all should be afforded equal freedom to share our content, under the law, as the cable companies are currently  provided.  This point demonstrates how it violates both equality and the rule of law, as we value it as a nation, despite the letter of the law itself.

If you disagree, then what specific sentence or sentences do you object to and why?

The letter of the law, as it currently exists, represents starch influence by a oligopoly of content producers, which came to exist through the mergers of mega-cable content producers, through time.  I find no issue in mergers themselves, but great issue with their usage of their empowerment, through uniting with another company, to influence law-makers in a direction which conflicts with our shared values.  I do not believe this is done in a mean-spirited fashion but I believe it is likely done out of selfishness. 

The internet empowers content producers like me the opportunity to have the freedom to share, and still be adequately compensated.  Content creators have gotten extremely wealthy, without the need to be a cable company, and often in spite of the cable companies desires:

Examples like John & Hank Green, Phillip Defranco, and Bo Burnham come to mind. 

Companies like Netflix, whose content like House of Cards and Orange is the New Black, millions of my fellow Americans enjoy and as such Netflix is extremely profitable, though mostly profitable due to their facilitation of content sharing.

Then cable service providers are facilitators of content sharing too.  As such, they should be compensated in some fashion for their facilitation.  Perhaps the fair thing in this case would be to allow Aereo to continue their service which vast quantities of our fellow Americans enjoy, but rule that they compensate the facilitators of the content with a reasonable amount that harms the ability of neither to continue growing their profit margins, perhaps in the range of 8-10% . 

Yet the need for compensation for facilitation, a real need in our society, must not be cause for use to violate the liberty of other facilitators to provide a means for content creators to share with content consumers.  It should also not violate equality in treatment under the law between Aereo and great facilitators like Directtv and Dish Network.  I’ve used both of their services, and I’d recommend both as facilitators but as an independent and poor college student I don’t have the means to buy their service, the facilitation of sharing.

Yet I do have the means to pay for an internet connection, as it is a priority because of the amazing things it empowers me to do, and as it enables superior facilitation of sharing between content creators and content consumers.

In closing, I’d love for our discussion on this to go viral, and I don’t care if my name is mentioned one time.  My ego is not what is at stake here, nor would I be much bothered if it were.  What is at stake here is violating our shared American values of the freedom to act, to paint our desires and dreams into reality, and the equality and fairness under rule of law to be empowered to do so. 

Let us all live love, joy and peace constantly,
May we live in accordance with our values, and through so be blessed in course of our future.
Caleb  Ball
(Senior, History)
Twitter: @PeaceEmpowers

URL: http://69.195.124.212/~makelif8/ourblog/

No comments:

Post a Comment