<!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="#333333">
<font face="sans-serif">Hi Lee</font><br>
<br>
On Saturday 16 April 2011 04:10 AM, Lee W McKnight wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:93F4C2F3D19A03439EAC16D47C591DDE034AC99722@suex07-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Fouad,
The good or bad news, depending upon one perspective, is that this issue will not really be 'settled' for years and years.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Bad news, because, as Lessig said, 'architecture is policy' and if
the architecture is already made and well developed by default,
there wont be much that policy can do long after. Hence the urgency
in the matter from a developing country point of view. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:93F4C2F3D19A03439EAC16D47C591DDE034AC99722@suex07-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
So there is plenty of time for other nations to consider and weigh their interests, and views. Especially since the moral imperative underlying the discussion, fairness in treating others, is I believe commonly held in all cultures since ancient times.
That is, if there is a ferry which may take you across a river, everyone knows the ferry must let you board, if you pay the fee.
Only problem is determining the moral equivalent on the Internet is subject to more interpretations.
Whereas in ancient times, if the ferryman would not let you on board, even though you were prepared to pay just like anyone else, you would beat him. People, and ferry operators, figured out thousands of years ago - it is best if anyone can get on.
Giving ATT or anyone else the same kind of beat down for a violation of the Internet equivalent - is a bit harder. </pre>
</blockquote>
A very important question to ask. Where does the coercive power to
ensure public interest based compliance lie. It used to lie with the
nation states but with globalization, global capital escapes these
controls by playing one state against the other, and developed
country states against developing country ones. Whereby, even if by
the logic of domestic pulbic interest NN is clearly important, this
imperative has to be wieghed against the huge global economic
advantage and benefits that developed country based global digital
corporates bring for these countries. Developing country
governments, on the other hand, have little political leverage over
these global corporates. Try to regulate them in public interest,
and they will abandon the country in a matter of days. <br>
<br>
This is 'the' key political issue in a globalised world, more so for
the inherently global phenomenon of the Internet. And the only
adequate response to it that comes to my mind is working towards
stronger (democratic) global political institutions. Starting with
framing global norms for NN would be a good thing to do in this
regard. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:93F4C2F3D19A03439EAC16D47C591DDE034AC99722@suex07-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Lee
________________________________________
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a> [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>] On Behalf Of Fouad Bajwa [<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:fouadbajwa@gmail.com">fouadbajwa@gmail.com</a>]
Sent: Friday, April 15, 2011 3:33 PM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>; parminder
Subject: Re: [governance] IGF relevance?
That is my feeling too. Everything seems to stop with EU and US
centric NN discussions and debates. The rest of the world can sit
quietly and wait while everything is okay on that side and the rules
are set for the rest to follow.
NN seems to be a no go area or no discuss issue for the developing
world and thats where the primary questions arises to how can
developing regions take on this debate because the neutrality of the
network is as important for them and their sustainability too.
The developed perspective usually is that what they say is what is
authority over any other discussion and I cannot buy that.
-- FoO
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 6:33 PM, parminder <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net"><parminder@itforchange.net></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On Thursday 14 April 2011 08:34 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
I am going to raise some eyebrows and question the decision to do a Network
neutrality workshop. This is an issue that is being and will be handled by
national regulatory authorities.
Can you tell me about some developing countries (other than Brazil, and
perhaps recently Chile) where anything is happening on Net Neutrality?
The positions of the various actors and interest groups are well known and
well-aired. Nothing the IGF says or does will have much impact on what
happens in this space. The US Congress will probably negate the current FCC
rules and the US will have to either pass new legislation or find some other
way to pursue those policy goals; the IGF does not enter into the equation.
The same can be said for Europe: the EU and national regulatory authorities
are actively debating this, and it is the opinions of the nra's, DG INFO, DG
MARKT and its competition law that matter, not IGF.
So that is where your world stops :). Yes, US and EU are doing fine at home
on NN, but can we, rest of us, not just wait till US and EU NN rules are
finalized and through their economic (also political and social) might
imposed on the rest of the world? By your permission, we are just seeking
democratic management of the medium that is touted as a great democratic
force. Do you agree to such an objective? do you want to contribute?
parminder
On the other hand, there are developments in IP addressing that cry out for
a global forum to work out a new policy. For some background, see this
recent IGP blog article:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/3/25/4778257.html">http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/3/25/4778257.html</a>
In facing a controversial issue that seemed to require global policy but go
beyond the mandate of ARIN, the head of ARIN recently asked on a public
list, sincerely, which venue could be used to discuss the issue?
It is abundantly clear that on a few key internet governance issues, ranging
from Wikileaks
to IP addressing there are inadequate globalized institutions.
One reason IGF is losing relevance, is that IGF's leadership seems to be
utterly blind when it comes to distinguishing between issues where it can be
entrepreneurial and fill gaps in the current institutional environment, and
issues where it has no real capacity to contribute anything.
It seems that IGF always falls prey to the disease of UN organizations,
which is to create opportunities for politicians and others who enjoy
publicity to intone pleasing platitudes on gigantic problems which it has no
capacity to solve, while completely avoiding the hard work of solving
smaller, less glamorous problems it can actually do something about.
--MM
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>