Creeping Balkanization is the internet’s worst enemy. As worldwide literacy grows exponentially, for the web, such expansion results in increasing pressure from corporate interests and regulatory nationalisms. Rising from its arcane beginnings as a DARPA research project, the net has become a symbol of borderless communication between individuals and of unlimited access to knowledge. Unfortunately, the net is about to become a heavily controlled environment, serving two classes of citizens: a dominant class that sets the rules (technological, legal and commercial) and the underclass of citizens and consumers.
Consider these two macro trends:
The first one stems from the world’s linguistic evolution. As of today, there are about one billion English-speaking people worldwide, half of which are native speakers. This latter proportion keeps growing as education improves; this growth reinforces the prevalence of English as the main internet lingua. With 500m people, English accounts for 27.5% of the connected population. Chinese makes the second language group with 400m people, 22.6% of the net population (and the mother of all government-mandated restrictions).
Beyond that, only the Spanish group (7.8% of the internet population) and the Japanese (5.3%) are above the 5% threshold. French accounts for 3.2% of internet users, with a global number of 57m.
Asia’s expanding literacy involves not only national languages (such as Mandarin or Hindi), but also the learning of English. In fact, the “use” of English could be much larger than shown in official statistics. Back in 2006, according to linguistics professor Braj Kachru, the “use” of English, as he called it, involved more than 500m people in India and China combined (see story in the Asian Times).
In many European countries, teenagers’ exposure to the English-speaking internet (for example through illegal downloads of movies and series) is a powerful learning vector.
The second trend involves the telecommunication infrastructure. The physical world is increasingly connected. Take optical fiber: its 2009 global market (outside China) represented 171m of fiber-kilometers, a 22% growth versus 2008 ; and that doesn’t reflect each fiber’s capacity to carry more data as carriers use more sophisticated modulation/demodulation circuitry.
Mobile internet? According the ITU (International Telecommunication Union), broadband mobile subscriptions are overtaking fixed connections. Today, there are about one billion 3G mobile subscribers worldwide, a number expected to double by 2013. This is driven by technology progress and falling prices. Between 2008 and 2009, the average global broadband subscription price has decreased by 42%; cell communications (4.6bn subscribers worldwide) prices dropped by 25%, and fixed lines by 20%.
You get my point : more English internet users, increasingly linked thanks to more and cheaper bandwidth. Of course, there are still 28 countries where the cost of internet broadband subscription is equivalent to one month’s wages. But the digital divide is narrowing. For mobile telephone usage, developing countries lag a well-equipped country like Sweden by only 10 years – but still by 72 years in terms of infant mortality.
Unfortunately, the emergence of this culture, of this knowledge-hungry population is met by an increasing lockdown of the internet. Of course, a Bangalore student can still get a lecture about electrical engineering provided by Stanford University or the MIT, but the commercial internet is now strictly reined in. This trend is driven by a cascade of technical controls that condition commercial policies which, in turn, must submit to trade regulations restraints.
#1 Technological control. Protocols, hardware, software are mostly US-designed. If, overnight, a couple of players such as Apple and Microsoft decide that Flash sucks, their gravitational field acts upon everything else (they might be right, technically speaking for web-video, but still many Flash-based multimedia productions becomes useless, like providing glasses that won’t read old books…) The same goes for hardware designs (microchips, graphic components), operating systems and even HTML norms (even though W3C, the World Wide Web Consortium, is supposed to be an international organization).
#2 Commercial control. As the internet becomes more applications-oriented, this control over hardware and OS designs and suppliers influences the availability of contents. The perfect example is the Apple ecosystem (iPhone, iPod, iPad devices + iTunes + Applications). Willing to focus on its lucrative domestic market, and for alleged production reasons, Apple decided to postpone the release of the iPad outside the US by a couple of months.
Fine. But in doing so, it blocked the access to the iPad App store and all its related contents. To use my own [admittedly grey-market] iPad, I managed to switch from a France-based iTunes account to a US one (you must have a billing address there). Then, a new world of contents and applications materialized before my eyes. All the applications I was prevented from grabbing for my iPhone suddenly became available, so did recent movies (to rent or to purchase), TV series, documentaries… and books.
#3 Regulatory control. Apple is not the only one to territorialize its system (although it does that with a great zeal). Country blocking — i.e. the ability to implement regional restrictions though Country Code Top-Level Domain – is in fact dictated by complex country-to-country copyright contractual agreements.
Movie releases work under strict rules which govern the availability timeline on different platforms: first in theaters, then on DVDs, paid-TV, cable, and finally broadcast. Each country has its own system that cannot be violated. As an example, this explains why the TV series Damages was first aired by the American cable network FX in July 2007, but had to wait February 2008 to show up on French pay-TV Canal+, and one more year to be shown on “free” broadcast TV.
Understandably, a French TV broadcaster will want to protect its expensive exclusivity. This is why the free streaming channel Hulu, all US networks and part of the iTunes Store are not accessible outside the United States.
But this system, engineered by corpocrats, is completely outdated. Release windows, regional rights restrictions no longer make sense in the internet era. As file sharing systems become easier to use (and as they are served using an ever-expanding bandwidth), all such restrictions do is encouraging massive illegal downloading, even in populations that are not particularly prone to it. Probably spending several thousands euros per year for all sorts of medias, I would have happily paid 4 dollars per episode for the Season 3 of Damages. But since it was not available thru any legal channel, I managed to get my weekly fix the very next day it was aired in the US.
The very absurdity of the global digital system is revealing itself. It created all the instruments for global access and, then, turned around and arbitrarily restricted its commercial use, paving the way for piracy. Think about it: our broadband networks now allow seamless streaming of films, TV shows, music and, soon, of a variety of multimedia products; we have created sophisticated transaction systems; we are getting extraordinary devices to enjoy all this; there is a growing English-speaking population that, for a significant part of it, is solvent and eager to buy this globalized culture and information. But guess what? Instead of a well-crafted, smoothly flowing distribution (and payment) system, we have these Cupertino, Seattle or Los Angeles-engineered restrictions.
C’mon guys. This is 2010. Take your private jets and travel a bit. You’ll see that in Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, or Oslo, most of us are global consumers who want one thing: being able to flash our credit card and buy every single piece of dematerialized cultural or informational good we want. Those passé commercial agreements are no longer enforceable. Time to tear down these digital walls.
—frederic.filloux@mondaynote.com
No related posts.




17 Comments
Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam, Oslo… May I add Milan? Excellent post. The question is how do we build a global rights regime?
Add Argentina. No music Apple Store. And the same with many apps. I can go to tv.com on my Mac but require an app in my iPod Touch that is only available fot the US
Same scenario repeats itself all around. In Brazil there is nothing but Apps available on iTunes and even those are restricted in the games sector because Apple could not be bothered to comply with the age rating legislation for video games. That means that no games are available to iPhone/iPod users in Brazil, unless they take the circuitous route of having an account in the US store.
In a slight defense of Apple I will say that most restrictions to what they sell where are related to contractual conditions with the copyright holders of the movies, music, books, etc.
You are totally correct however in pointing out the consequence: free downloads through peer-to-peer networks. It is naive to the extreme to imagine that the fans of a particular TV series will just wait around for a year to watch the next episode if they can do so in the same day. All this does is to empty the audience numbers for the series when it does go on TV and loose out on the revenue that would come from that digital purchase.
Yes. Tear down those digital Berlin walls! Knut
I decided to write a book about the iPad. As a British living temporarily in Malaysia, I’m not allowed to buy one or use the iBookStore. It cost me a lot, but the grey market solved the iPad purchase problem
It blows me away that there will soon be more English speakers in China than the US. Not that they will be fluent, right away, but it makes one think.
Another metric: more scientific papers come in from “not the US” than from the US now.
Walls can also keep people in, and that is a prison. If we don’t grow up pretty quick our species will fail and none of this will matter. What we have now is fundamentally unsustainable. We all know what happens after the lines are drawn.
What bothers me more is that the very same rules that only let the US to enjoy the fully functional technological / commercial model is the one offshoring the development of these most attractive apps and games to my “backyard” in Buenos Aires.
You are blaming business executives, who are responsible for innovation and getting things done, for problems created by government bureaucrats, who have never produced anything.
“This is 2010. Take your private jets and travel a bit” News flash! There tooooo busy sitting in their offices thinking of ways to control us with restrictions on hardware,software,apps, anything!
Elishia Windfohr
> we have these Cupertino, Seattle or Los Angeles-engineered restrictions
Correct, but at Seybold San Francisco in 1994 when Michael Spindler of Apple and John Warnock of Adobe announced the shift from paper-based exchange with ‘Print, then Distribute’ to paper-less exchange with ‘Distribute, then Print’ the audience was wondering how business models might be made from PDF and HTML.For instance, The San Francisco Examiner was free for anyone, anywhere in HTML format. The technical, social and political issue is not that software companies change into publishers, but that as publishers they may put in place censureship policies on publishing of the technical, social and political impact of their products and services. If there is no longer a separation between the publisher and the substance of what is published, the publisher is in position not to publish.
Censureship is a challenge in California, as it no doubt also is in China.
Henrik
It’s not just about passively absorbing the goods — people want to share them with each other, reuse them, remix and modify them. Most common concluding line I use when giving talks for http://QuestionCopyright.org is: “We just got done building a cheap, worldwide copying and editing machine. Now are we going to let ourselves use it or not?”
“most of us are global consumers who want one thing: being able to flash our credit card and buy every single piece of dematerialized cultural or informational good we want.”
Geez, you’re such a *consumer*. Think about refraining, consuming less and enjoying more.
Thank you for the link
thank’s for the information that yo made…
hey there, I would like ot thank you for posting such a useful outline
I believe that technological control over the web is the most powerful force. I disagree with the idea of the segmentation of the web of this kind. But in a sense this struggle to gain control over the web could create opportunities online. Transitions of this kind always do. In other words, Balkanization had both its winners and losers.
8 Trackbacks
[...] Balkanizing The Web Um artigo sobre classes, fronteiras e poder na web. [...]
[...] good we want.”. We need, in short, content owners to take the lead in reversing the Balkanization of the Internet. Apple, as a gatekeeper, is right there with the content owners and shares their [...]
[...] such expansion results in increasing pressure from corporate interests and regulatory nationalisms.Close FB.init({appId: ’130434348997′, status: true, cookie: true, xfbml: [...]
[...] Balkanizing the Web | Monday Note – Intressant artikel om balkaniseringen av internet. Dock vill jag pålysa att Bruce Sterling var först med teoriseringen runt fenomenet 1996, The well och diskussionstråden “islands in the net” (som även den är en antologi) [...]
[...] Balkanizing the Web | Monday NoteJune 1, 2010 – Intressant artikel om balkaniseringen av internet. Dock vill jag pålysa att Bruce Sterling var först med teoriseringen runt fenomenet 1996, The well och diskussionstråden “islands in the net” (som även den är en antologi) [...]
[...] right direction. But one key obstacle remains: the balkanized internet (see a previous Monday Note Balkanizing the Web), i.e. the country zoning system. By slicing the global audience in regional markets, both the [...]
[...] right direction. But one key obstacle remains: the balkanised internet (see a previous Monday Note Balkanizing the Web) – ie, the country zoning [...]
[...] un ostacolo chiave resiste: la balcanizzazione di internet, (see a previous Monday Note Balkanizing the Web), ossia l’espandersi del regionalismo della rete. Suddividendo il pubblico globale in mercati [...]