<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Milton<br>
<br>
The first problem of your 'reality check on economics' is that it is
basically extreme neo-liberal economic thinking- let markets
decide, least regulation is the best. The deregulation (repeal of
glass-steagall for instance) as well as inadequate regulation of the
financial markets is accepted as an important cause of the crash of
the financial markets - and unfortunately while some sections of
society made billions, the costs are being borne by others, most of
who had no connection with the causes. In the case of the Internet,
which is a global phenomenon, we have no meaningful / democratic
global regulation structures/processes yet. Which given the huge
concentration of power is a dangerous situation and one which is no
longer tenable. American regulation should not take the place of
global regulation (remember wikileaks and paypal etc etc which is
one of the cases the joint civil society statement/ background note
highlights). And here I am quite aware of your concerns about
American domination as well... (one point of agreement!!). <br>
<br>
Your text book definition of monopoly is not useful or relevant in
this debate - if you believe that the large transnational IT
corporates do not have huge market power (and use it to their
advantage) then your ideology is clouding your vision of reality.
Can I seriously not use google search engine or facebook? have you
bought a computer where the manufacturer agreed to debundle windows
operating system? what is my negotiating power as a consumer
vis-a-vis these companies. Most of us blindly click on the 'I
accept' button to become users, what is the inference from this for
the relative power of the corporate and consumer? And where we dont
have monopolies in many cases we have oligopolies, this makes your
belief of perfect competition in free markets a myth.<br>
<br>
Neoliberal economics (aka market fundamentalism) is discredited and
a failure and is no answer to our challenges in IG - it is infact
the problem... <br>
<br>
This does not mean (and sometimes you are eager to make this
conclusion) that IT for Change is for the other extreme - Socialism
or complete government control over the markets. I don't think
anyone is making that argument. So your point about the failure of
publicly funded search engines is superfluous.<br>
<br>
As economists agree, we are all mixed economies and we need to find
the truth somewhere in between. The Internet itself gives us some
new powerful methods for framing the processes for such regulation /
policy making and while we debate the best way global democracy can
be furthered, laissez faire is no option, and harmful as a
governmental take-over of the Internet.<br>
<br>
regards,<br>
Guru<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title></title>
<br>
<br>
</div>
On 17/05/12 20:35, Milton L Mueller wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD217838E@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<div style="border-width: medium medium medium 1.5pt;
border-style: none none none solid; border-color:
-moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color -moz-use-text-color
blue; padding: 0in 0in 0in 4pt;">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="">The “geopolitical influence” of
the US and Europe is quite different, since all major
Internet corporations –in fact monopolies in their
respective domain- are American : Google, Cisco, Microsoft,
Apple, Facebook, e-Bay … Nowhere in the APC statement these
monopolies are addressed despite the strong links they have
with Internet governance.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: 5.25pt;">
<b><i><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family:
"Courier New"; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">[Milton
L Mueller] The dialogue on enhanced cooperation is
becoming polluted with simplistic and inaccurate
economic nostrums.
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">May I request that the word
“monopoly” be used with at least some attention paid
to its actual meaning?
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">From the MIT Dictionary of
Economics: “a firm is a monopoly if it is the only
supplier of a homogenous product for which there are
no substitutes and many buyers.” This definition can
be made less restrictive by relaxing the assumption
that there are no substitutes, to include imperfect
substitutes.
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">But even so, none of the firms
cited above are monopolies. None. Some have varying
degrees of market power in specific sectors, but none
are close to being _global_ monopolies. Apple, for
example, does not even surpass Samsung in its share of
smartphones.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">I am also curious to know what is
going on when people group the regulation of equipment
manufacturers (Apple, Cisco) under the rubric of
“internet governance.” Same for computer operating
systems.
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">Moreover, I wonder whether the
people who think UN-based institutions are an
appropriate response to market power in the ICT sector
have done their homework. There are powerful,
well-resourced antitrust and economic regulatory
agencies in the U.S., Europe, and various other
countries in Latin America, Asia and elsewhere. The
operate under specific laws, not under a theory of
resentment (that’s a good thing), laws which have
evolved for decades and which have established
precedents and bodies of research behind them
regarding the nature of market power, the impact of
regulation and antitrust intervention on innovation
and consumer welfare, etc.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">Moreover, it’s not like these firms
are running amok. There have been in the recent past,
or currently are underway, serious tangles with
Microsoft, Intel, Google, Apple, and Facebook on
various issues involving their market power* - by
antitrust authorities, privacy regulators and consumer
protection regulators. Have our agitators made a case
that these entities are incapable of doing their jobs?
If so, how would the political economy of regulating
big business improve at the global level – or would it
get worse?
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">Is the absence of European
companies in the list of globally competitive firms,
Mssr. Fullsack, due to some cosmic injustice, or
simply to the over-regulated, protectionist,
nationalist structure of European Internet and ICT
markets, which does not produce globally competitive
firms? Why is it that tens of millions in subsidies
for a European search engine haven’t produced
anything? Might it be because consumers decide for
themselves what is a better service and that people
don’t care much whether a service provider is
American, European or Chinese as long as they can use
their own language?
<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">Could there be some serious
engagement with these issues and, perhaps, a little
more knowledge and a lot less populism? The idea that
some vague notion of “governance” is going to save us
from any and every problem in the internet economy
sounds to me like the fulminations of wannabe
politicians seeking power for themselves and not
interested in actually solving problems.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);">(*Note the absence of Cisco from
that list – the equipment mfring biz is highly
competitive and Cisco is declining in market share,
flat in revenue, and considered “on the ropes” by
stock investors for the past 2 years). Huawei, on the
other hand…<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style=""><b><i><span style="font-size:
11pt; font-family: "Courier New"; color:
rgb(31, 73, 125);"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>