Ofcom chairman talks about regulating Net content

"The blurring of boundaries between TV and the internet raises questions of regulation, watchdog Ofcom has said." says the BBC.

"Content on TV and the internet is set to move closer this year as TV-quality video online becomes a norm.

At a debate in Westminster, the net industry considered the options.

Lord Currie, chairman of super-regulator Ofcom, told the panel that protecting audiences would always have to be a primary concern for the watchdog.

Despite having no remit for the regulation of net content, disquiet has increased among internet service providers as speeches made by Ofcom in recent months hinted that regulation might be an option.

At the debate, organised by the Internet Service Providers' Association (ISPA), Lord Currie did not rule out the possibility of regulation.

"The challenge will arise when boundaries between TV and the internet truly blur and then there is a balance to be struck between protecting consumers and allowing them to assess the risks themselves," he said. "

There is another gem part way through this article:

"Richard Ayers, portal director at Tiscali, said there was little point trying to regulate the internet because it would be impossible."

I thought this kind of libertarian idealism was well and truly buried now but apparently not. Even John Perry Barlow, author of "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace" has accepted the Lessig 'code is law' message:

"Any time you engage with information, the reality that you extract from that information is shaped by the tools that deliver it. Microsoft’s information presentation is such a monoculture that it edits out a lot of other realities. So you have a new kind of monopoly that affects the way people think in ways that are invisible to them. It’s a very dangerous form of monopoly, especially now that they are talking about the "trusted computing" model, where it will be very difficult for you to save and then pass on documents on systems without identifying yourself.

That system is supposed to be designed to help control digital rights management. By its nature it will be great for political rights management, because it’s an enormously penetrative surveillance tool, and it makes it hard to do anything anonymously involving a computer."

Simply put, the the technology of the Internet is artificially created. It may have started with an open, difficult to regulate "end to end" architecture but this has been changing because it can be changed. Change the technology and centralised regulation becomes possible. The "it's impossible to regulate the Internet" rhetoric no longer holds water.

The head of BT's entertainment division has much more interesting and controversial things to say, than the man from Tiscali:

"If content is on-demand, consumers have pulled it up rather than had pushed to them, then it is the consumers' choice to watch it. There is no watershed on the net"

That could set a few hares running. We're have significant potential for a broadcatching rather than a broadcasting model the technologies continue to merge. The evolution towards that potential will be a fascinating story to watch.