And the user may have a higher comfort level deciding what information to provide rather than worrying about what inferences might be made from what they've gathered.

The question is not whether we want to keep this open, neutral Internet - we do, or should - but whether government rulemaking can give us the result we want.

And the user may have a higher comfort level deciding what information to provide rather than worrying about what inferences might be made from what they've gathered.

In making policy designed with copyright in mind, you end up making decisions about whether other important technologies, such as privacy-enhancing or file-search technologies, should be encouraged or discouraged. A collision is happening between creativity and protecting IP.

Innovation happens because there are people out there doing and trying a lot of different things.

Growth comes out of a healthy competitive atmosphere, not trying to choose a particular path forward.

Vigorous enforcement of copyrights themselves is an important part of the picture. But I don't think that expanding the legal definition of copyright outside of actual copyright infringement is the right move.