<html><body><span style="font-family:Verdana; color:#000000; font-size:10pt;"><FONT style="COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: " face=Verdana color=#000000 size=2>
<DIV>Mr. Peter and others,</DIV>
<DIV> The cable TV comparison is also very skewed, unless all the different programming packages cost the same, or perhaps, there would be varying qualities of service (not just packages) for the different prices. Comparing apples with oranges gives you contrast, but not really direction. </DIV>
<DIV> I hate to perpetuate this LONG and circuitous discussion, but the internet was designed to share information, not sell it. No one putting up a website expects someone should have to pay more to a third party to see their website than any other. When I pay for my cable internet delivery service, I am paying for the level of access to the internet, not variety of content. If I want a wider selection than ICANN offers, I simply set my DNS to a different set of servers that offer more TLDs and do not police for me; I don't change service providers! If I want a more child-safe subset of ICANN, for example, then I chose DNS of a group that polices for me. My cost remains the same whether I see more, or less than what ICANN is paid to bring us. The only ones really trapped are those that don't know, or refuse to believe there is life "outside the box" we are handed when we sign up for "basic" internet service, at whatever speed or bandwidth.</DIV>
<DIV> This aspect of Net Neutrality need not be an issue if people are educated to their choices and how to plug into them. Cable TV has a long way to go in that respect!!!</DIV>
<DIV>-Karl E. Peters, President</DIV>
<DIV>Top Level Domain Association, Inc.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: verdana" webmail="1">
<DIV>-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE: [governance] Re: What is Network Neutrality<BR>From: "Ian Peter" <ian.peter@ianpeter.com><BR>Date: Wed, January 14, 2009 2:47 pm<BR>To: <governance@lists.cpsr.org>, "'Ginger Paque'" <ginger@paque.net>, <BR>"'McTim'" <dogwallah@gmail.com><BR><BR>The Google definition doesnt work for me - in pay-tv models users are in<BR>charge of what content they view, they just have to choose which packages of<BR>content they pay for.<BR><BR>Ian Peter<BR>PO Box 429<BR>Bangalow NSW 2479<BR>Australia<BR>Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773<BR><A href="http://www.ianpeter.com/" target=_blank mce_href="http://www.ianpeter.com">www.ianpeter.com</A><BR><BR><BR>> -----Original Message-----<BR>> From: Ginger Paque [<A href="http://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php#Compose" target=_blank mce_href="http://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php#Compose" _onclick="if(window.location==top.location){Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=ginger%40paque.net');}else{top.Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=ginger%40paque.net');} return false;">mailto:ginger<B></B>@paque.net</A>]<BR>> Sent: 15 January 2009 00:23<BR>> To: governance@lists.cpsr.org; 'McTim'; 'Parminder'<BR>> Subject: RE: [governance] Re: What is Network Neutrality<BR>> <BR>> From McTim:<BR>> Google offers a definition that I think we can adopt in our work going<BR>> forward:<BR>> <BR>> "Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in<BR>> control of what content they view and what applications they use on<BR>> the Internet."<BR>> <BR>> Ginger says: I strongly second this suggestion--it addresses simply and<BR>> clearly the point that is important to users.<BR>> <BR>> Also from McTim:<BR>> What do you realistically expect the IGF to do besides talk?<BR>> <BR>> Ginger says: Exactly. The IGF is the Internet Governance FORUM. It is a<BR>> place to discuss and debate: to talk. But it can inform, teach, support<BR>> and<BR>> foster principles it chooses, and we can affect those choices by our<BR>> statement to the MAG.<BR>> <BR>> Two points we can emphasize are NN, and Remote Participation, two areas<BR>> that<BR>> are important right now, and affect the concrete function of users. I<BR>> suggest we work toward formulating a short concise statement to the MAG on<BR>> these two points.<BR>> <BR>> -----Mensaje original-----<BR>> De: McTim [<A href="http://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php#Compose" target=_blank mce_href="http://email.secureserver.net/pcompose.php#Compose" _onclick="if(window.location==top.location){Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=dogwallah%40gmail.com');}else{top.Popup.composeWindow('pcompose.php?sendto=dogwallah%40gmail.com');} return false;">mailto:dogwallah<B></B>@gmail.com</A>]<BR>> Enviado el: Miércoles, 14 de Enero de 2009 08:38 a.m.<BR>> Para: governance@lists.cpsr.org; Parminder<BR>> Asunto: Re: [governance] Re: What is Network Neutrality<BR>> <BR>> On 1/13/09, Parminder <parminder@itforchange.net> wrote:<BR>> ><BR>> > I am forwarding the response of Steve Anderson who leads the<BR>> > Save-Our-Internet campaign in Canada, and to whom my original email in<BR>> > this long and interesting thread was addressed. He replied with cc to<BR>> > IGC list, but since he is not a member I am forwarding it to the list. I<BR>> > also wanted to share how civil society actors involved in democratic<BR>> > media issues look at the problem<BR>> <BR>> We are all "civil society actors involved in democratic media issues".<BR>> <BR>> , since I think the views in the present<BR>> > discussion on the list have been, if I may say so, dominated by a<BR>> > (unadulterated) free market based economic framework.<BR>> ><BR>> <BR>> You may say it, but you would be incorrect. What Milton, Ralf and I<BR>> have been saying is that the Internet is not egalitarian in some of the<BR>> ways that you seem to think it is.<BR>> <BR>> Google offers a definition that I think we can adopt in our work going<BR>> forward:<BR>> <BR>> "Network neutrality is the principle that Internet users should be in<BR>> control of what content they view and what applications they use on<BR>> the Internet."<BR>> <BR>> This definition doesn't open the can of worms (what is ok and what is<BR>> not), as Google does here:<BR>> <BR>> <a href="http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2007/06/what-do-we-mean-by-net-" target=_blank mce_href="http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2007/06/what-do-we-mean-by-net-">http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2007/06/what-do-we-mean-by-net-</a><BR>> neutra<BR>> lity.html<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> > From Steve's response, it looks like that the NN advocacy position I<BR>> > have been trying to formulate is not so obscure after all, as is made<BR>> > out by much of the discussion on this list.<BR>> <BR>> Not obscure, just too specific.<BR>> <BR>> On the other hand, everyone<BR>> > does realize that the whole area is quite complex, and evolving.<BR>> > However, from an action oriented advocacy point of view, which is what<BR>> > we are trying to do vis a vis the IGF, one needs to formulate advocacy<BR>> > positions as we go along based on our basic political and ethical<BR>> > convictions. One cannot just keep waiting for a danger to completely,<BR>> > and often irrevocably, envelop us, before thinking about doing anything.<BR>> ><BR>> > And, as we all know, not doing anything is an important political<BR>> position.<BR>> ><BR>> > It is my humble opinion that this is what is happening in many quarters<BR>> > vis-a-vis price-differentiated content transmission over the Internet<BR>> > which is the most direct violation of the original and the fundamental<BR>> > NN principle. To this extent, merely (and only) talking<BR>> <BR>> What do you realistically expect the IGF to do besides talk?<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> --<BR>> Cheers,<BR>> <BR>> McTim<BR>> <a href="http://stateoftheinternetin.ug/" target=_blank mce_href="http://stateoftheinternetin.ug">http://stateoftheinternetin.ug</a><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" target=_blank mce_href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">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" target=_blank mce_href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">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" target=_blank mce_href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></span></body></html>