—————When an organization has been shown to be corrupt, has been shown to be breaking the law, isn’t it normal to confiscate some of that organization’s property?—————
No. It’s SOP to go through legal proceedings and find a proper litigatory (Probably not a word) sentence or fine.
That’s not what Wu is talking about. He is talking about theft. The word “nationalization” is not an accident. They know what they’re saying when they use it.
-————Normally that’s in the form of a monetary fine, but then I’ve always been a fan of alternative, targeted sentencing. ——————
Nationalization doesn’t require the use of judges or juries.
————I taught you that, and now you’re corrupting it.—————
You give me too much credit.
Yes, I did first become aware of that talking point via your postings, but I’m not the one who corrupted it. Tim Wu is talking about nationalization of source code. The FCC is as infiltrated as FDR’s presidency was.
To say I’m corrupting it would be akin to wiping alger hiss out of the history books.(not equivalent, but akin)
-————You seem to have a misunderstanding of what net neutrality is.—————
No, I don’t. Tim Wu, Free Press, and the people at the FCC are being very clear about their intentions. They’ve used Elmo for propaganda, they’ve talked about taking over content on TV for ‘racial equality’, and quite a few other things. Oh yeah, popups for alternative views on websites.
-————The government removes their power to interfere with commerce.—————
With the level of collusion between the FCC, Obama’s Czars, and a host of other things, there’s no evidence of that.
The evidence points to government removing everybody’s power to interfere with government. That’s what marxists do, every time. Check the history books.
They do it every time. And you won’t argue otherwise.
And he said that in the context of how to punish illegal monopolies. That does go through legal proceedings. I don't like Wu or his larger vision, but this basic point is correct. If a monopolist is convicted, the government should be able to determine the best remedy. If that remedy is determined to be source code (which has a monetary value), then that amounts to nationalization of the source code.
Nationalization doesn’t require the use of judges or juries.
IIRC, the last time the government nationalized an industry was the telephones in 1918. Initial debates over it years earlier came from it being seen as a more modern version of the postal service and its roads, a constitutional role of the federal government, and the term used was "postalization." The government had already been heavily involved in, and had financed and given other considerations to, the telegraph and the phone system before then.
It was briefly nationalized in 1918 for national security reasons of WWI. You'll love to know that the main impetus was to prevent a planned strike by operators trying to become unionized (remember, back then there were no government employee unions). Even though the nationalization was a war power enacted by Congress, it did hit the Supreme Court, which agreed. There is remedy in the courts, and it was used. BTW, AT&T loved the nationalization, and profited heavily from it.
Yes, I did first become aware of that talking point via your postings
Your underhanded way of saying "Yes, you're right, you taught me that."
Tim Wu is talking about nationalization of source code. The FCC is as infiltrated as FDR’s presidency was.
Actually, Wu was talking about that in the context of the FTC. You really need to read up instead of just catching corporate talking points. Wu is my enemy on many fronts, so I bothered to do it. Why don't you?