<html>
<body>
Thanks for this.<br><br>
Sorry for the language - occupational hazard. I'm not sure what you are
saying - it seems that you see problems with any form of governance
<i>per se </i>with the possible exception of direct democracy. Even so,
some arrangements work better than others in reconciling and advancing
collective and individual interest (and the many overlapping group
interests that come and go in between these extremes). The final report
also draws attention to forces that can restrain both the internal
weaknesses of these organisations and their vulnerability to capture,
corruption or irrelevance. Two are competition among different (self-,
co-, and formal) regulatory bodies and informed choice (to participate
and/or comply).<br><br>
There's lots of self-reg around outside the ICT domain - e.g. medicine,
financial services, law, accountancy, etc. Not all of these fail, and not
all the time.<br><br>
Of course, it may be that your objection is not to the
"regulation" part but the "self" part. "We the
people" seems to turn anything the (US) government does into 'self'
regulation - except when it (or its 'self-regulatory' dependent bodies -
I name no names) tries to regulate beyond its borders.<br>
So, could you be a bit more specific about what you object to:
<ul>
<li>regulation in principle
<li>regulation by an industry group of its own members' actions (codes of
conduct)
<li>regulation by an industry group of other members of the industry
(standards)
<li>regulation by an industry of others' actions (e.g. insurance
companies' 'self-regulation' of claimants and policyholders)
<li>regulation by a multistakeholder forum
<li>'walled garden' controls placed on subscribers and affiliated content
providers by vertically-integrated ISPs
<li>etrc.?
</ul>Thanks,<br><br>
J.<br>
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device<br><br>
<br><br>
At 00:47 07/09/2008, Jeffrey A. Williams wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Ecase and all,<br><br>
Good political language used in your response here. But
hardly<br>
clarifies my concern and other remarks to the extent of what and<br>
how individuals would be effected or otherwise required to<br>
comply. Ergo, more general language would be preferrable,<br>
and yet again I still fully assert that self regulation or
co-regulation<br>
doesn't work, and never has for any significant period of time.<br><br>
Although I prefer self regulation of an individual basis, I
dispise<br>
it on a collective basis or organizational basis unless of course<br>
I personally agree with whatever regulation that may apply!
>:)<br><br>
Governments as you know from your own countries history,<br>
as with mine, rarely always adhere to their own regulations, and<br>
in some instances some certain exepmtions to such regulation is<br>
granted or otherwise "Understood". Same is even more true
for<br>
NGO's or other advocacy oriented groups.<br><br>
ecsae@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk wrote:<br><br>
> Two comments, if I may: the purpose of the study was to help the EC
to take self- and co-reg into account in future ex ante evaluation,
impact assessment and policy formation, not to comprehensively survey or
evaluate the status quo, so ITU and other specific stakeholders - even
important ones - are not all there. The intent was rather to use the
cases to indicate the range of initiatives and the classes of things the
EC should consider.<br>
><br>
> Second, we strongly support wide partcipation and the need for
standing and voice to encourage useful engagement, but recognise both the
tension between wide participation and the efficacy of the organisation
(relevance, coherence and levels of compliance) and the potential of such
platforms to encourage strategic or collusive behaviour, to further
hidden agendas or to use self-reg to create "Potemkin
regulators" in order to pre-empt real action - intentionally or
otherwise.<br>
><br>
> J.<br>
><br>
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device<br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: "Jeffrey A. Williams"
<jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com><br>
><br>
> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 14:40:25<br>
> To: <governance@lists.cpsr.org><br>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Study on ICT self- and co-regulation<br>
><br>
> Hakikur and all,<br>
><br>
> Institutions are often times out of touch with
users. Self regulation<br>
> or Co-regutlation if in order to be reflective, effective, and
useful<br>
> must have at it's base, the approval of individual users.
Therefore<br>
> individual users, must have a direct input and determination of
the<br>
> process for developing such regimes or whatever regulation
policies<br>
> are to be set, or otherwise imposed. The will of the governed
must<br>
> prevail.<br>
><br>
> Hakikur Rahman wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Dear Adam,<br>
> ><br>
> > Thank you for sharing an important document with the list. As
a<br>
> > researcher in this field, I find it valuable. However,
regarding<br>
> > infrastructure and standards setting I do not see much of ITU's
role<br>
> > in the case study. Perhaps, I may have missed it, or the case
studies<br>
> > included only the mentioned institutions.<br>
> ><br>
> > Best regards,<br>
> > Hakik<br>
> ><br>
> > At 07:47 PM 9/5/2008, Adam Peake wrote:<br>
> > >Hi,<br>
> > ><br>
> > >The European Commission recently published a study
assessing the<br>
> > >efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of ICT self-
and<br>
> > >co-regulation initiatives. The study was led by RAND Europe
(Chris<br>
> > >Marsden
<<a href="http://chrismarsden.blogspot.com/" eudora="autourl">
http://chrismarsden.blogspot.com/</a>>)<br>
> > ><br>
> > >The study is available from European Commission<br>
> >
><<a href="http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/evaluation/studies/s2006_05/index_en.htm" eudora="autourl">
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/information_society/evaluation/studies/s2006_05/index_en.htm</a>
><br>
> > ><br>
> > ><br>
> > >The study consists of two main parts: a mapping exercise
that<br>
> > >examines existing regulatory and co- and
self-regulatory<br>
> > >institutions and identifies "candidate" case
studies for closer<br>
> > >analysis. And a second phase report providing the results
of 21<br>
> > >short case studies. Case studies were presented in four
groupings:<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Internet Infrastructure and Standards (ICANN, Nominet,
IETF, W3C, ICRA)<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Internet Self- and Co-Regulation (IWF, INHOPE, EuroISPA,
KJM, FSM)<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Content and Filtering/Rating (ICSTIS, IMCB, NICAM, PEGI,
ATVOD)<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Emerging Self Regulation Areas (SecondLife, Creative
Commons, Social<br>
> > >Network: Bebo, Trustmarks, London Action Plan, IGF)<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Total of all phases about 1300 pages.<br>
> > ><br>
> > >A clear conclusion of the report is that robust
self-and<br>
> > >co-regulatory organisations only develop where their design
and<br>
> > >dynamics take a multi-stakeholder approach as their basic
principle.<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Parts already seem dated and it wasn't written too long ago
(3rd qtr 2007).<br>
> > ><br>
> > >Adam<br>
> >
>____________________________________________________________<br>
> > >You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> > > governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
> > >To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> > >
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<br>
> > ><br>
> > >For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> > >
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" eudora="autourl">
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
> ><br>
> >
____________________________________________________________<br>
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> > governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
> >
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<br>
> ><br>
> > For all list information and functions, see:<br>
> >
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" eudora="autourl">
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
><br>
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders
strong!)<br>
> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -<br>
> Abraham Lincoln<br>
><br>
> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with
what is<br>
> very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt<br>
><br>
> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden,
B;<br>
> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by<br>
> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<br>
> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]<br>
> ===============================================================<br>
> Updated 1/26/04<br>
> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS.<br>
> div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<br>
> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail<br>
> jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com<br>
> My Phone: 214-244-4827<br>
><br>
> ____________________________________________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<br>
><br>
> For all list information and functions, see:<br>
>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" eudora="autourl">
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br><br>
Cheers,<br><br>
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders
strong!)<br>
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -<br>
Abraham Lincoln<br><br>
"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what
is<br>
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt<br><br>
"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden,
B;<br>
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by<br>
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<br>
United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]<br>
===============================================================<br>
Updated 1/26/04<br>
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.<br>
div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<br>
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail<br>
jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com<br>
My Phone: 214-244-4827</blockquote></body>
</html>