Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Tables and Figures
- Acknowledgments
- List of acronyms
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Ideological Origins of Open Standards I: Telegraph and Engineering Standards, 1860s–1900s
- 3 Ideological Origins of Open Standards II: American Standards, 1910s–1930s
- 4 Standardization and the Monopoly Bell System, 1880s–1930s
- 5 Critiques of Centralized Control, 1930s–1970s
- 6 International Standards for the Convergence of Computers and Communications, 1960s–1970s
- 7 Open Systems and the Limits of Democratic Design, 1970s–1980s
- 8 The Internet and the Advantages of Autocratic Design, 1970s–1990s
- 9 Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
9 - Conclusion
Open Standards and an Open World
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2014
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Dedication
- Contents
- Tables and Figures
- Acknowledgments
- List of acronyms
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Ideological Origins of Open Standards I: Telegraph and Engineering Standards, 1860s–1900s
- 3 Ideological Origins of Open Standards II: American Standards, 1910s–1930s
- 4 Standardization and the Monopoly Bell System, 1880s–1930s
- 5 Critiques of Centralized Control, 1930s–1970s
- 6 International Standards for the Convergence of Computers and Communications, 1960s–1970s
- 7 Open Systems and the Limits of Democratic Design, 1970s–1980s
- 8 The Internet and the Advantages of Autocratic Design, 1970s–1990s
- 9 Conclusion
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
By the mid-1990s, the Internet’s advocates had learned to cast Internet history in a most flattering light. They downplayed its autocratic and closed world origins, belittled the work undertaken by their competitors in Open Systems Interconnection (OSI), and reimagined the Internet as an open system. In their revisionist hands, the Internet standards process became a novel form of distributed control and participatory democracy that emerged organically from the interactions of Internet engineers. Internet users, dazzled and enchanted by their sublime new toy, searched for secrets of the Internet’s astonishing success that they could apply in other realms. A chorus of academics and policy makers unwittingly latched on to an origin myth – that the Internet was a meritocracy, the product of “nerds” and “hackers” who collaborated through a decentralized and participatory design process.
The Internet standards process was an especially rich source of inspiration for legal scholars who offered new interpretations of legal philosophy, the process of innovation, and the role of nongovernmental and transnational regulatory regimes in the twenty-first-century global economy. In many cases, the lessons gleaned from the Internet success story flew in the face of accepted scientific and engineering practice – evidence, it would seem, that the Internet’s emergence truly marked a new kind of technology-enabled society. For example, Harvard law professor Jonathan Zittrain generalized from his reading of the Internet’s architectural history to propose a “procrastination principle” built on the assumption that “most problems confronting a network can be solved later or by others.” This principle, Zittrain argued, “suggests waiting for problems to arise before solving them.”
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Open Standards and the Digital AgeHistory, Ideology, and Networks, pp. 262 - 280Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2014
References
, “Wizards, Bureaucrats, Warriors, and Hackers: Writing the History of the Internet,” American Historical Review 103 (1998): 1530–1552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Today’s Cooperative Competitive Standards Environment and the Internet Standards-Making Model,” in Brian Kahin and Janet Abbate, eds., Standards Policy for Information Infrastructure (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1995)
, Launching the DNS War: Dot-Com Privatization and the Rise of Global Internet Governance (PhD dissertation, University of Miami, 2006), 1–5
and , Transforming Computer Technology: Information Processing for the Pentagon, 1962–1986 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996)Google Scholar
and , “Looking to the Internet for Models of Governance,” Ethics and Information Technology 6 (2004): 161–173Google Scholar
and , “The Ecology of Standards Processes: Insights from Internet Standard Making,” MIS Quarterly 30 (2006): 469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of Free Software (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008), 33–36 and 57–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Power and the Internet,” Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 8 (2010): 323–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Habermas@Discourse.Net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace,” Harvard Law Review 116 (2003): 749–873CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , Rough Consensus and Running Code: A Theory of Transnational Private Law (Portland, OR: Hart Publishing, 2010)Google Scholar
and , New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing without Organizations (New York: Penguin Books, 2008)Google Scholar
, The Future of The Internet – And How to Stop It (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008), 31, 135Google Scholar
, Jr., The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering Anniversary Edition (Boston: Addison-Wesley, 1995), 42Google Scholar
, “The Emerging Organizational Synthesis in Modern American History,” Business History Review 44 (1970): 279–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Technology, Political Economy, and Professionalization: Central Themes of the Organizational Synthesis,” Business History Review 57 (1983): 473–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Recasting the Organizational Synthesis: Structure and Process in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries,” Business History Review 79 (2005): 1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Creative Society – And the Price Americans Paid for It (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012)Google Scholar
, Building a New American State: The Expansion of National Administrative Capabilities, 1877–1920 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Reorganizing the Organizational Synthesis: Federal-Professional Relations in Modern America,” Studies in American Political Development 5 (1991): 119–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999)Google Scholar
, Standardization and Digital Enclosure: The Privatization of Standards, Knowledge, and Policy in the Age of Global Information Technology (Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Transaction Cost Economics: The Natural Progression,” in Karl Grandin, Les Prix Nobel (Stockholm: Nobel Foundation, 2010)Google Scholar
, , and , “Beyond Markets and Hierarchies: Toward a New Synthesis of American Business History,” American Historical Review 108 (2003): 404–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , eds., Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999)Google Scholar
, , and , eds., The Challenge of Remaining Innovative: Insights from Twentieth-Century Business History (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2009)Google Scholar
and , Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989)Google Scholar
, , and , eds., The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1989)Google Scholar
, Civilizing the Machine: Technology and Republican Values in America, 1776–1900 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1999)Google Scholar
, Protocol: How Control Exists after Decentralization (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2006)Google Scholar
, Network Nation: Inventing American Telecommunications (Boston: Harvard University Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Instrumental Community: Probe Microscopy and the Path to Nanotechnology (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Crusade for Credible Energy Information and Analysis in the United States, 1973–1982,” History and Technology 28 (2012): 149–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Networks, Standards, and Critique,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 34 (2012): 79–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Danish Welding Institute and Force Technology, 1940–2005: Technical Standardization and the Shaping of Business,” Enterprises et Histoire 51 (2008): 57–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, From the American System to Mass Production, 1800–1932 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984)Google Scholar
, Cooperation and Competition: The Emergence of a National Trade Association (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1966)Google Scholar
, Philadelphia’s Philosopher Mechanics: A History of the Franklin Institute, 1824–1865 (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1974)Google Scholar
, “Procedure,” American Standards Year Book (New York: American Standards Association, 1929)Google Scholar
, “The GSM Standard: Explaining a Success Story,” Journal of European Public Policy 8 (2001): 432–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “The Economics of Telecommunications Standards,” in Robert W. Crandall and Kenneth Flamm, eds., Changing the Rules: Technological Change, International Competition, and Regulation in Communications (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1989)Google Scholar
, “The FCC and Changing Technological Standards,” Journal of Communication 32 (1982): 137–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “The FCC as an Institution,” in Leonard Lewin, ed., Telecommunications: An Interdisciplinary Text (Dedham, MA: Artech House, 1984)Google Scholar
and , “High Technology Consortia: A Panacea for America’s Competitiveness Problems?” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 6 (1992): 335–372Google Scholar
, , and , “SEMATECH and Collaborative Research: Lessons in the Design of High-Technology Consortia,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 13 (1994): 723–758CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Standards Processes and Objectives for the National Information Infrastructure,” in Brian Kahin and Janet Abbate, eds., Standards Policy for Information Infrastructure (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1995)Google Scholar
, Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by its Inventor (New York: HarperOne, 1999), 98Google Scholar
, “Dot-Org Entrepreneurship: Weaving a Web of Trust,” Enterprise et Histoire 51 (2008): 44–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Constructing Legitimacy: The W3C’s Patent Policy,” in Laura DeNardis, ed., Opening Standards: The Global Politics of Interoperability (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2011)Google Scholar
, , and , “Institutional Entrepreneurship in the Sponsoring of Common Technological Standards: The Case of Sun Microsystems and Java,” Academy of Management Journal 45 (2002): 196–214Google Scholar
, “Open Standards in the European Computer Industry: The Case of X/OPEN,” in H. Landis Gabel, ed., Product Standardization and Competitive Strategy (New York: North-Holland, 1987)Google Scholar
, “Deregulating Self-Regulated ATM Networks,” Economics of Innovation and New Technology 1 (1990): 85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Economic Issues in Computer Interface Standardization,” Economics of Innovation and New Technology 1 (1990): 135–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Formal Standards-Setting for Global Telecommunications and Information Services: Towards an Institutional Regime Transformation?” Telecommunications Policy 20 (1996): 789–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , Coordinating Technology: Studies in the International Standardization of Telecommunications (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1998), 43–84Google Scholar
, “Creating Fax Standards: Technology Red in Tooth and Claw,” Japanese Journal for the History of Science and Technology 11 (2010): 37–65Google Scholar
, “The Rise of Consortia in the Information and Communication Technology Industries: Emerging Implications for Policy,” Telecommunications Policy 23 (1999): 159–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Consortia in the Standards Development Process,” Journal of the American Society for Information Science 43 (1992): 559–5653.0.CO;2-P>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Intellectual Property Rights and Standard Setting Organizations,” California Law Review 90 (2002): 1889–1980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Internet, Innovation, and Intellectual Property Policy,” Columbia Law Review 103 (2003): 534–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard-Setting,” in Adam B. Jaffe, Josh Lerner, and Scott Stern, eds., Innovation Policy and the Economy (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2006)Google Scholar
, ed., Standards Development Patent Policy Manual (Chicago: American Bar Association, 2007)Google Scholar
and , “Patents and the Performance of Voluntary Standard Setting Organizations,” Management Science 54 (2008): 1920–1934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , “Standards, Intellectual Property Disclosure, and Patent Royalties after Rambus,” North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology 10 (2009): 233–282Google Scholar
, “Antitrust Immunity and Standard Setting Organizations: A Case Study in the Public-Private Distinction,” Cardozo Law Review 25 (2004): 1393–1427Google Scholar
, “The Monopoly Enigma, the Reagan Administration’s Antitrust Experiment, and the Global Economy,” in Kenneth Lipartito and David Sicilia, eds., Constructing Corporate America: History, Politics, Culture (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004)Google Scholar
and , “Promoting Legitimacy in Technical Standardization,” Science, Technology & Innovation Studies 2 (2006): 19–39Google Scholar
, “Standardization – A New Discipline?” in Proceedings of 2nd IEEE Conference on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology (Boulder, CO: International Center for Standards Research, 1999)Google Scholar
, ed., Standardization Research in Information Technology: New Perspectives (Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2007)Google Scholar
, “Standard Setting in the United States: Private and Public Sector Roles,” Journal of the American Society of Information Science 43 (1992): 531–5373.0.CO;2-Q>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, Anthony Rutkowski, Michael Spring, and Jon O’Donnell, “The Structure of IT Standardization,” StandardView 4 (1996): 9–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “The Changing Standards World: Government Did It, Even though They Didn’t Mean To,” Standards Engineering: The Journal of the Standards Engineering Society 52 (2000)Google Scholar
, “A Work in Progress: Government Support for Standard Setting in the United States, 1980–2004,” Consortium Standards Bulletin 4 (2005): 1–8Google Scholar
and , Transforming Global Information and Communication Markets: The Political Economy of Innovation (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, The Trouble with Physics: The Rise of String Theory, the Fall of a Science, and What Comes Next (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2006)Google Scholar
, “The Principles of Open Standards,” Standards Engineering 50 (November/December 1998): 1–6Google Scholar
“Open Standards, Open Source, and Open Innovation: Harnessing the Benefits of Openness,” Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization 1 (2006): 119–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, “Procedure,” American Standards Year Book (New York: American Standards Association, 1929)Google Scholar
, “Shaping Communication Networks: Telegraph, Telephone, Computer,” Social Research 64 (1997): 1067–1091Google Scholar
, Cyberselfish: A Critical Romp through the Terribly Libertarian Culture of High Tech (New York: PublicAffairs, 2001)Google Scholar
, The Hacker Ethic and the Spirit of the Information Age (New York: Random House, 2001)Google Scholar
, From Counterculture to Cyberculture: Stewart Brand, the Whole Earth Network, and the Rise of Digital Utopianism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar