<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
hi all <br>
<br>
Taking Suresh's approach, I've extracted a few key points from this
thread which I think we could focus on in terms of the IGF
secretariat's request for workshop proposals to be submitted by the
end of April. I wonder Riaz if you anticipated the twists and turns
this debate would take when you posted the article?<br>
<br>
Bertrand: This notion of "fractal sovereignty" is harder to handle than
the
traditional territory-based one but probably more adapted to our
connected world than the notion of strict subsidiarity : the challenge
is to manage interdependence and interactions.To enrich the discussion,
I'd like to put in perspective here the
issue of IDNs. Will the physical location of the future major
registries for IDN TLDs (particularly gTLDs if any) give the
corresponding national courts a specific authority/legal power on all
registrants in those TLDs, even if they are not located in that country
and have no business with its citizens ? <br>
<br>
Bertrand: It is exposing the core challenge of competing or overlapping
jurisdictions and probably the need for some "globally-applicable
public policy principles".<br>
<br>
Karl: The same legal foundation that was used would also work against a
registry (as opposed to a registrar) located in the US.
Thus even if the registrar is not in the US, if the name is in .com
then the US could use the same legal approach to apply leverage to the
registry, Verisign. And since many of the large registries are in the
US, that means that much of the DNS is vulnerable to this tactic.
Actions like this do not promote the cohesion of the DNS but, instead,
create forces tending towards splitting and fragmentation.
<br>
<br>
Meryem: What I would really want to be addressed, and what is the right
(and
main) question in my opinion, is the resolution of the conflicts of
jurisdiction in Internet content-related cases.<br>
<br>
Bertrand: In cases of competing or overlapping jurisdictions, the key
question you want to see addressed, if I understand well, is the
transparency and accountability (including capacity for redress and
appeal) that should exist at these different levels. It is indeed the
right question. Relying merely on the national law or on contracts is
not enough to provide a coherent framework. This is the challenge we
are facing. <br>
<br>
Meryem: If this kind of analogy is not wrong, then this simply
demonstrates
that we're back (or still) facing issues which were already discussed
more than 10 years ago: there are continuous attempts to impose an
editorial liability on technical intermediaries (at different levels
ISP, registrar, registry, etc. one should also consider search
engines), simply because it's easier to target them and to have them
"do the job" (censorship of contents and/or activities). Either they
accept to be the censorship instrument or they would face themselves
the penalty.
<br>
<br>
Bret: I don't think most registrants understand the consequences of
selecting
a services provider -- be it a registrar or a hosting company -- based
outside their own country.
Isn't this an opportunity to teach? Maybe we should do something on
this inside IGF. I would think the governments of the world would
welcome the opportunity to teach users about the benefits of locally
owned businesses.
<br>
<br>
Milton: I think a better way to ask that question is, how can we, via
Internet<font face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> </font>governance
and global public policy making, better realize the potential<font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> </font>of the Internet to offer
global services without ensnaring end<font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> </font>users/customers in the
idiosyncracies of territorial jurisdictions? How<font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif"> </font>can we create a global
-- and globally accountable -- "jurisdiction"<font
face="Times New Roman, Times, serif">within which these services can
be offered?<br>
<br>
</font>I think this interchange has thrown up a cluster of issues that
could usefully form the basis of an IGF workshop on globally-applicable
public policy issues and practical strategies for dealing with
cross-border internet governance. The value of the debate on this
thread for me is the move from a concrete case example to the broader
set of public policy issues it reveals, both new (are we seeing the
fracturing of sovereignty? do we need a new set of global public policy
primciples or is more work on international law related to the internet
needed?) and old (getting technical intemediaries to do government's
enforcement work, which in another emerging concrete case is the French
and British government threats to ISPs to clamp down on filesharing
practices -
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/22/filesharing">http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/22/filesharing</a>). Meryem's
point about 'cascade responsibilty' systems is very relevant here. The
interchange on the thread also highlights the public education function
of the internet governance forum - that there are practical strategies
that would be useful for registrars, ISPs and governments in dealing
with internet governance problems - in the absence of an overarching
public policy framework or sufficent clarity with respect to
international law and jurisdcition.<br>
<br>
For an IGF workshop(s) it may be worth looking at a different approach
to the traditional panel discussion. We could have the presentation of
a particular case like this one (or a number of cases) and then ask
reprsentatives of different stakeholders to respond to the public
policy issues thrown up by the case. And see to what extent this adds
to or subtracts from the underlying (repressed) issue of enhanced
cooperation. I tend to agree with Bertrand and Karl that we are facing
the threat of the fracturing of sovereignty which left unaddressed will
bring about the fracturing of the internet. Do we have to wait until
the return of the repressed for anything to be done about it? A
reasonable public policy approach would say: if we can identify
problems emerging, then we had better start thinking of solutions and
encouraging a debate with the relevant political and regulatory
authorities. <br>
<br>
On practical strategies we could perhaps organise a best practice forum
along the lines Bret suggests.<br>
<br>
fractal or fracturing<br>
winter returns<br>
who among us is whole?<br>
<br>
willie<br>
<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
Bret Fausett wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:D846E1E6-F6CA-469C-B95F-17BDB43D848B@internet.law.pro"
type="cite">On Mar 6, 2008, at 3:01 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Another way to put this is that as long as
85% of the DNS registry
<br>
market is located in the US, the US government and US-based law will
<br>
have near-global authority over key aspects of the Internet.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
If 85% of the market is in U.S.-based business, perhaps the best lesson
here is that registrants should move their domain names out of the U.S.
unless they want to be subject to U.S. laws. I don't think most
registrants understand the consequences of selecting a services
provider -- be it a registrar or a hosting company -- based outside
their own country.
<br>
<br>
Isn't this an opportunity to teach? Maybe we should do something on
this inside IGF. I would think the governments of the world would
welcome the opportunity to teach users about the benefits of locally
owned businesses.
<br>
<br>
-- Bret
<br>
____________________________________________________________
<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
<br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>
<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>