<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Do we apply the same standards when addressing the rights of weaker individuals as we do when addressing the rights of weaker governments?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Who should a strong government be accountable to?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>We cannot ignore the fact that quite often the weak are weak because of something they are responsible for. As we cannot ignore the benevolence of so many on this list, we also cannot totally ignore the benevolence of strong government. Sometimes weakness is a result of making a conscious choice not to risk what is given, by demanding what is earned. If a weak government is a welfare government, what right do they have to demand?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>--- On <B>Sat, 11/28/09, Michael Gurstein <I><gurstein@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid"><BR>From: Michael Gurstein <gurstein@gmail.com><BR>Subject: RE: Extending Rights to the Internet: (Was RE: [governance] Example<BR>To: governance@lists.cpsr.org, "'McTim'" <dogwallah@gmail.com><BR>Date: Saturday, November 28, 2009, 4:58 PM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>McTim,<BR><BR>As in the case of cultural products (the Convention on Cultural Diversity)<BR>and the emerging discussion around A2K, in a globalized world the practical<BR>capacity of national governments to regulate knowledge (as other) products<BR>based in some manner on a globally accessible platform (the Internet) is as<BR>Parminder noted only available to the strong.<BR><BR>The capacity to do this is strengthened by the availability of global<BR>agreements on what would be the allowable content of such regulations (and<BR>would be even more strengthened with the availability of enforcing such<BR>agreements but that is another discussion).<BR><BR>Why should the Internet be an exception to this (and would for example, such<BR>an agreement be a means not only to enhance the capacity of weak governments<BR>but also to control (or at least make accountable) the excesses of the<BR>powerful ones (and perhaps weak ones such as your
own)...<BR><BR>It need hardly be pointed out that much of the world is now suffering as a<BR>result of the excesses of an absence of regulation in "knowledge (as other)<BR>products based in some manner on a globally accessible platform" i.e. the<BR>international unregulated trade in financial derivatives and the like.<BR><BR>M<BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>From: McTim [mailto:<A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=dogwallah@gmail.com" ymailto="mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com">dogwallah@gmail.com</A>] <BR>Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 4:49 AM<BR>To: <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>Subject: Re: Extending Rights to the Internet: (Was RE: [governance] Example<BR><BR><BR>On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Parminder <<A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=parminder@itforchange.net"
ymailto="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</A>><BR>wrote:<BR>> Hi All<BR>><BR>> Getting late into something which as Carlos said is an interesting <BR>> discussion...<BR>><BR>> Even if we agree to not apply the terms authoritarianism and human <BR>> rights<BR><BR>I'm glad we are agreed on something.<BR><BR>> here, the underlying issue is of great importance<BR><BR>What is the underlying issue? That goods and services are available to some<BR>global consumers and not others?<BR><BR>suggesting urgent need for<BR>> global Internet policy making, and developing institutions that are <BR>> adequate to that purpose.<BR><BR>No, it doesn't suggest that at all. What it suggests is an opportunity for<BR>people to provide a service/software to those unserved markets.<BR><BR><BR>The issue also suggests that existing global policy<BR>> institutions do not cover a good deal of new ground
that is opened up <BR>> with this global phenomenon of Internet becoming an important part of <BR>> more and more aspects of our social lives...<BR>><BR>> It is fine to say that this is a consumer rights issue, and i agree <BR>> with Meryem that the real issue is that there should be enough <BR>> alternative software/ devices and interoperability should be <BR>> ensured... But the point is, who ensures that.<BR><BR>Well, since the Kindle format is HTML based, that would be the W3C.<BR><BR>However, If Amazon wants to make proprietary software, that is their right,<BR>no?<BR><BR>There ARE many paypal alternatives, the free market ensures there are<BR>alternatives.<BR><BR>Economically less powerful (developing) countries do<BR>> not have the muscle to regulate these unprecedentedly huge global <BR>> digital companies,<BR><BR>Sure they do, they enact laws and regulations that apply within their<BR>borders.<BR><BR>and so they
have to simply submit. The developed countries often<BR>> see strong economic interest in not disturbing the 'imperialist' <BR>> designs of these companies which are almost all based in these <BR>> countries and bring them a lot of economic benefits and sustaining <BR>> advantage (the framework of a new wave of neo-imperialism).<BR>><BR>> Who then regulates these giant corporates, whose power now rivals that <BR>> of many states?<BR><BR>Nation states (and regional grouping like the EU).<BR><BR>There seem to be a clear and strong tendency, shared by much of<BR>> civil society in the developed world - IGC not being immune to it - <BR>> that Internet (and its digital ecosystem) should be left unregulated, <BR>> mostly.<BR><BR>???? the Internet is (too) heavily regulated (and taxed) by national<BR>governments. Here in Kenya for example, ISPs are licensed and special taxes<BR>apply (~35% of my access costs are
direct taxes). There are content laws<BR>(and even content providers need a license). The government even shut down<BR>the IXP until it could figure out what kind of beast it was and invent a new<BR>license for it.<BR><BR><BR>At<BR>> least there seems to be no urgency to do anything about global <BR>> Internet policy arena. The fear of statist control on the Internet has <BR>> become all that ever counts in any discussion on global Internet <BR>> governance/ policy-making.<BR><BR>That's perhaps because it (statist control) is the single largest threat to<BR>Internet freedom.<BR><BR>(This has become almost a red-herring now.) This is<BR>> problematic for developing countries, and to the collective interests <BR>> of the people of these countries, (the right to development) which <BR>> are in great danger of losing out as the (non-level) digital <BR>> playground is being set out, without due regulation in global
public <BR>> interest. To get the right global governance institutions and <BR>> outcomes to address this vital issue, in my opinion, is what should <BR>> centrally constitute the 'development agenda in IG'.<BR><BR>So you'd like to build a global Internet police agency to enforce a "right<BR>to paypal"? That is completely unrealistic, not to mention undesirable.<BR><BR><BR>><BR>> I would consider it very inappropriate, and very inconsiderate, to <BR>> compare such real problems that developing counties increasingly face, <BR>> and will face in future to an even greater extent, like the <BR>> non-availability of 'basic' and enabling software like e-readers, with <BR>> non-availability of Mexican food in Geneva... It is even more <BR>> inappropriate to speak of people of 'certain persuasion' who in WTO <BR>> arena oppose certain multinational invasion of unprotected markets in <BR>>
developing countries, as being a sentiment and act in opposition to <BR>> raising the issues of necessary provision of basic enabling software/ <BR>> devices on fair and open standard terms to people of developing <BR>> countries. Our organization has joined protests on many WTO issues, <BR>> but do clearly sympathize with the present issue under consideration. <BR>> They proceed from very different logics, but have a convergence in the <BR>> fact that (1) global economy (and society) have to regulated in <BR>> global public interest , and (2) the interest of developing countries <BR>> is often different from that of developed countries. Appropriate <BR>> global regulatory and governance systems have to be built which take <BR>> into account these differentials, without being formulaic about it. <BR>> That in my understanding constitutes the development agenda in global <BR>>
forums.<BR>><BR>> Many other examples of commercial digital services have been given - <BR>> like paypal etc - denial of which can have a very strong <BR>> exclusionary effect of people and groups... Exclusion has to be seen <BR>> and addressed in its real, felt forms and not by simplistic <BR>> comparisons, which smack of insensitivity.<BR>><BR>> Think of Microsoft suddenly refusing to give Windows related services <BR>> to a country (I know many would take it as a blessing, but there are <BR>> strong issue there still), or Skype not being available in a country <BR>> which would cut its residents off many a global tele-meetings <BR>> (including civil society ones). Or, Google, especially after it has <BR>> all of us doing every second online activity on its platform, cutting <BR>> off its services to a country...<BR><BR>You do every "second online activity" via Google because it offers
services<BR>that you want at a great price (free). If Google/Skype/M$ shut off access<BR>to certain IP blocks (not countries), which is their right IMO, then there<BR>are ways to route around such behavior (proxies).<BR><BR>-- <BR>Cheers,<BR><BR>McTim<BR>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route<BR>indicates how we get there." Jon Postel<BR>____________________________________________________________<BR>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org"
ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR><BR>For all list information and functions, see:<BR> <A href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target=_blank>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR><BR>____________________________________________________________<BR>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance@lists.cpsr.org" ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<BR> <A href="http://us.mc839.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR><BR>For all list information and functions, see:<BR> <A
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target=_blank>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table>