<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18852"></HEAD>
<BODY
style="WORD-WRAP: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space">
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=156403116-26112009>Gee
Bill,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=156403116-26112009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=156403116-26112009>I
thought I was sufficiently skilled at putting my foot in my mouth without others
trying to do it for me...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=156403116-26112009></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN class=156403116-26112009>What I
said was...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial><SPAN class=156403116-26112009>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><I><FONT face="Courier New"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2>If access to the Internet is a necessary requirement for participation in
an "Information Society" then access to the tools that allow for or facilitate
the use of the Internet especially when those tools are linked into some sort of
monopolistic position with respect to the use of the Internet should surely fall
under that rubric.<SPAN class=156403116-26112009> (Nothing there that I can see
about Canon, Flickr, international pricing
etc.etc.)</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></I></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><I><FONT face="Courier New"><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT
size=2>I don't know the details of the case under discussion here but it would
follow that if certain information is only accessible on the Internet via a
certain tool then denial of access to that tool is the same as denial of access
to that information.<SPAN class=156403116-26112009> (on a national level this is
for example the case for ensuring that government information on the web is
available in a format which is accessible by those with different types of
disability).</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT></I></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><SPAN class=156403116-26112009><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>The above logic is I believe the logic behind the determination by that
steadily increasing number of countries which are accepting in one form or
another a "Right to the Internet"...</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><SPAN class=156403116-26112009><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>Since as we all presumably agree, the governance of the Internet (and the
opportunities which the Internet provides) is necessarily global then such
governance, it could/should be argued should follow a similar logic at the
global level.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><SPAN class=156403116-26112009><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>As
you well know many countries followed policy/regulatory strategies to ensure
some sort of universal access to POTS for precisely these reasons--not going so
far as making this a "right" presumably for the logistical reasons that you
point to... Again as you/we all would agree the Internet and the opportunities
that it affords are rather different from POTS and thus how it and these should
be treated in the context of governance matters should differ as
well.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><SPAN class=156403116-26112009><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>The modalities of implementing such a position I would of course leave to
you and others better versed in such matters than
myself.</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><SPAN class=156403116-26112009><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>Best,</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><SPAN class=156403116-26112009><FONT color=#0000ff
size=2>Mike Q\A</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px" dir=ltr>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT size=2
face=Tahoma>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> William Drake
[mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Thursday,
November 26, 2009 4:14 AM<BR><B>To:</B> Michael Gurstein<BR><B>Cc:</B>
governance@lists.cpsr.org; 'Fouad Bajwa'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [governance]
Example of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism -<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Hi
Michael,
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>I did read you message and thought I responded by implication, but I can
be more direct if you like. So leaving aside the "authoritarian"
nonsense, which you'd told me not to dismiss and to which I hence responded,
if you are saying that people have a human right to be able to purchase
any commercially provided tools that can be construed as necessary for access
broadly defined, and that companies therefore should have some sort of moral
or legal obligation to make said tools available to anyone anywhere, some
questions follow. For example, which tools qualify, for which types of access?
My wife just brought home a new camera from Japan. Did we have a
human right to this camera? After all, to fully access and use the
functionalities of Flickr etc we need one. Does Cannon have an
obligation to sell it in every country? What about pricing? The
thing cost $300 more in Switzerland than it does in Japan; should Cannon be
bound to sell it for the lower price here, irrespective of distribution and
other costs? Do I have a human right to customer support? Via a
toll free number? Software upgrades? What about standards, must they be
open as a matter of right? Or substitute a Kindle, iPhone, whatever, for my
camera...</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>POTS universal service requirements are clear and defensible, basic dial
tone from territorially bound, price regulated, infrastructure-based operators
that have market power etc. Universal access requirements get a little
more complex given the different characteristics and regulatory status of the
ISP industry and terminal equipment etc, but the challenges are reasonably
tractable and some governments are trying. But extending the notion of
rights and obligations far beyond this seems, to put it mildly, fraught with
difficulties. I'm open to persuasion though, if you'd like to map out
the equipment/service/applications/suppliers/terms and conditions etc are to
be covered as a matter of right, as well as how and by whom such rights would
be established and adjudicated globally etc. It's a different argument
to the one we were talking about and would merit a different subject line, but
I'm all eyes.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Thanks,</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Bill</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>
<DIV>On Nov 26, 2009, at 10:01 AM, Michael Gurstein wrote:</DIV><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite">
<DIV><!-- Converted from text/rtf format -->
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Hmmm....</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Bill, it might have been good to
have actually read what I wrote and engaged with that rather than a straw
man based on a repetition of Fuad's original statement.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><I><FONT size=2 face="Courier New">If access to the
Internet is a necessary requirement for participation in an "Information
Society" then access to the tools that allow for or facilitate the use of
the Internet especially when those tools are linked into some sort of
monopolistic position with respect to the use of the Internet should surely
fall under that rubric.</FONT></I></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><I><FONT size=2 face="Courier New">I don't know the
details of the case under discussion here but it would follow that if
certain information is only accessible on the Internet via a certain tool
then denial of access to that tool is the same as denial of access to that
information.</FONT></I></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>To my mind this is not a
strictly commercial issue.</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Mike</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>-----Original
Message-----</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2
face=Arial>From: William Drake [</FONT></SPAN><A
href="mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch"><SPAN lang=en-us><U><FONT
color=#0000ff size=2
face=Arial>mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch</FONT></U></SPAN></A><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>] </FONT></SPAN><BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 12:18
AM</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>To: Michael
Gurstein</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Cc: <A
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A>;
'Fouad Bajwa'</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2
face=Arial>Subject: Re: [governance] Example of Corporate Internet
Authoritarianism -</FONT></SPAN> </P><BR>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Hi Michael,</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>On Nov 25, 2009, at 6:50 PM,
Michael Gurstein wrote:</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>> I think that Bill's casual
dismissal of this issue is not appropriate.</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>There's a difference between
disagreeing with something and being inappropriate.</FONT></SPAN> <BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>> </FONT></SPAN><BR><SPAN
lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>> The logic here is surely the same as
the overall logic of a "Right to </FONT></SPAN><BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT
size=2 face=Arial>> the Internet" (remembering that I claim no expertise
in the domain of </FONT></SPAN><BR><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2
face=Arial>> discussion around "Rights"...</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Really? "Right to the
Internet" is the same as declaring any company that doesn't sell a product
in a given country to be "authoritarian."? Sorry, but this strikes me
as fuzzy logic, and not the computer science kind.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>It used to be that when a
transnational firm entered a developing country's market folks of certain
persuasions would decry this as imperialist etc. But now if a firm
does not enter a market we can also call them names normally associated with
governments that brutalize their populations to retain political
power? Maybe you should notify all the groups working against WTO
agreements etc that they have it backwards and are promoting
authoritarianism, whereas what they really should be doing is demanding that
every company everywhere be required to sell everything everywhere
else. </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Fouad says Amazon is
authoritarian because it "dictates who buys or isn't allowed to buy from its
website;" presumably, this would apply to other companies and distribution
channels as well. Let's leave aside the many reasons why a company
might not serve a given market---costs, level of effective demand,
distribution, local partner requirements, regulatory/policy
uncertainty/unfavorability, the prospects of fraud (as Carlton notes), etc
etc---since I guess normal business considerations don't matter. All
that does by Fouad's standard is can I buy what I want, and if not, they're
equivalent with, say, the Burmese junta.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I can't get real Mexican food at
Geneva grocery stores. I couldn't buy a Coke at the Sharm airport,
only Pepsi. I can't watch most US TV shows over the net in
Switzerland. I can't see most non-Hollywood US films, e.g. indies, at
Geneva movie theaters. But I want these things. So am I a victim of
authoritarianism? </FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>I'm sorry to hear that Kindle
for PC is not currently available in Pakistan. Perhaps it would make
sense to actually find out why this is so and see if anything can be done to
encourage change? Might be more productive than misplaced
sloganeering.</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Best,</FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P><SPAN lang=en-us><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Bill</FONT></SPAN>
</P><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium Arial; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2; LETTER-SPACING: normal; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"
class=Apple-style-span>***********************************************************<BR>William
J. Drake<BR>Senior Associate<BR>Centre for
International Governance<BR>Graduate Institute of International
and<BR> Development Studies<BR>Geneva, Switzerland<BR><A
href="mailto:william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch">william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch</A><BR>www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html<BR>***********************************************************<BR><BR></SPAN></DIV><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>