That's because there is no better alternative. Without regulation you're just asking providers of free services to spend their time and money on integrating wit

That's because there is no better alternative. Without regulation you're just asking providers of free services to spend their time and money on integrating with a non-profit or NGO-provided... what? Data vault? That would only help with preserving raw data, not the social network that's the actual valuable part of systems like Twitter. Courtesy and integrity for free services which change direction involves giving people sufficient notice, if possible, and allowing people to export their data, if possible. That's all! Anything more is a ridiculous expectation. Sometimes it's not possible. You might think that you're going to secure funding in time, and then you don't, and you don't have the money to pay Amazon this month and now your service is gone. Do you think that people who start free services on the internet have an obligation to supply that service, even if it means they pay for it instead of paying their rent? Should the founders of FreeWebService have to live on the street so that you can keep your social network alive? Of course, if there were an American-tax-payer-funded NGO which would support my free web service when I ran out of money, I would definitely make a lot more free web services. I think a lot of people outside of the US would. :oD