Tom Wheeler

I have to agree on these multiple pages of small print legalese that in essence says, hey, we're not giving you the product until you turn over all your privacy rights.

Lawyers call that a contract of adhesion.

I call it, I have what you want, and I'm not going to give it to you until you give me your private information and allow me to follow you across the web anywhere.

I think we need some kind of basic rules.

There's nothing wrong with saying, what about if we just collected the information that's necessary to conduct the transaction that you go on Google and you put in a search and the information that's necessary for that and to answer that doesn't include, for instance,

your location and, um, and the last eight sites that you went to, but that's what gets collected.

So we, we, we've reached a situation where we just need some basic guard rails.

What are the rules?

And, um,

And those rules probably ought to be decided by folks other than those who profit by making self-interested rules for self-advancement.

Does that mean the government?

One of the things that I propose is that we need a whole new approach to oversight.

So first, the first component is what you and I have been talking about thus far.

Is there...

necessity for oversight of the activities of the dominant digital companies and my feeling is yes but the question then becomes what kind of oversight and what i definitely do not believe in is the kind of oversight that we saw in the industrial era

which is micromanagement, top-down kind of activities that inhibit innovation, inhibit investment in this dynamic economy.

So what we need is a whole new approach.

We need to be as innovative in our oversight of the companies as the innovators themselves are in creating their new ideas.

The reality today is if you want to have an online relationship, if you want to be able to do commerce, if you want to be able to exchange with your friends through a common platform,

You have to do it.