In particular, Bartow argues that Zittrain’s vaunted generativity (roughly, the ability to do new and unanticipated things with a technology) operates at multiple levels: the App Store is generative in one sense, though locked down in many others. I don’t think Zittrain ignores this, but I was struck by Bartow’s extension of the argument to say that “[f]or companies, closely following the acts and omissions of their customers or client base is generative behavior, even though it relies on tethers. Information about consumers can lead to innovations in goods and services as well as in marketing them.” Eric von Hippel’s work on user innovation seems quite relevant here: if true innovation, as opposed to improvements in known uses/devices, rarely comes from producer companies, then gathering information about what consumers do with the stuff they’re handed is far from sufficient to protect innovation, and the argument for allowing jailbreaking/tinkering etc. is stronger. As Bartow points out, consumer protection law might be a fruitful source of relevant principles—which would mean that we’d have to do more to unify consumer protection and competition policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment