<HTML><BODY>
I do not agree with this doomsday view. First, a large part of the article notes that there are dangers to this strategy - the part that you clipped makes it very clear that there are risks in this approach ("The vehemence with which Google is pursuing its campaigns is astonishing because it entails considerable risks for the company") - thus it does not support the slippery slope that you worry about. <BR>
<BR>
Further, setting aside whether any of these companies you list are actually quasi-monopolies or not (Flickr??), many industries gather together in a trade association to influence public policy - together they may represent more than 90% of the industry, so is that also intrinsically dangerous? Indeed, how did the copyright issue get on the agenda of lawmakers in Germany in the first place - surely through lobbying efforts by the media companies, no?<BR>
<BR>
Finally, at issue here is that a Google service that many users clearly find useful, that delivers eyeballs to media companies, and that does not directly involve advertising is at risk (Google news pages do not have advertising, at least here in Switzerland). Instead of doing what newspapers in Brazil did, and stopping search engines from including their stories, the media companies in Europe have sought a regulatory solution in order to increase their earnings - companies that can write stories and editorials criticizing lawmakers, by the way - so what is wrong with Google asking its users to push back?<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: <a href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a> [mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein <BR>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 5:33 PM<BR>
To: governance@lists.igcaucus.org; 'Adam Peake'<BR>
Subject: RE: [governance] More... Google: "Internet Freedom!"... (to do whatever it pleases and serves its business interests?<BR>
<BR>
Adam, the issue is not the new/old business models (and I have no particular bias one way or another for old or new enterprises or their business models--and to be clear I sincerely admire and appreciate Google as a company, their products, their highly competent and effective staff and spokespeople, and their overall demeanour). <BR>
<BR>
What is important, as the Spiegel article is pointing to, is the way in which Google is using its market strength (and one should say, their overall new media savvy) to attempt to manipulate political processes. <BR>
<BR>
Given their size, wealth, reach and impact this is a very very dangerous slippery slope and given the global scope of Google and similar quasi-monopoly Internet-native enterprises--Facebook, eBay, PayPal, Amazon, Flickr, Youtube all come immediately to mind--this is an exceedingly dangerous precedent and one, which at the moment no national (or global) governmental system seems particularly well equipped to deal with (except through the building of equally repugnant and dangerous national Internet firewalls). <BR>
<BR>
M<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: <a href="mailto:apeake@gmail.com">apeake@gmail.com</a> [mailto:apeake@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam Peake <BR>
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 7:46 AM<BR>
To: <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a> <BR>
Subject: Re: [governance] More... Google: "Internet Freedom!"... (to do whatever it pleases and serves its business interests?<BR>
<BR>
German publishing houses and Google currently in a fight over proposed legislation that would require Google to pay the publishers when they use snippets of text from articles etc in search results.<BR>
<BR>
New business models/old. Traditional media vs. new. Same in WCIT, ENTO and OTT players. Best not to try and fit the story to one's personal bias.<BR>
<BR>
Adam<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 12:24 AM, michael gurstein <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> <BR>
wrote:<BR>
> <a href="http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/google-encourages-users-t" target="_blank">http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/google-encourages-users-t</a> <BR>
> o-join-campaign-against-copyright-draft-law-a-870590.htm<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> It is a new type of lobbying power when Google now endeavors to enlist <BR>
> its users in the struggle to defend its own business interests. In the <BR>
> language of the Internet, one could also say that the company is <BR>
> trying to crowdsource its own lobbying efforts. This is a widespread <BR>
> method in the US, where it's known as grassroots lobbying.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> In doing so, the company is relying on a trick that Germany's Pirate <BR>
> Party has also used to achieve many of its successes: It merely brands <BR>
> a proposal that it's targeting as a threat to the free, open and<BR>
uncensored Internet.<BR>
> The tactic behind this move is obvious. Recently in the US and on a <BR>
> European Union level, a number of bills have failed due to resistance <BR>
> from online campaigns. With its current campaign, Google is seeking to <BR>
> use this to its own benefit -- and is openly playing on politicians'<BR>
> widespread fear of a shitstorm.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Legal but Risky Business<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> The vehemence with which Google is pursuing its campaigns is <BR>
> astonishing because it entails considerable risks for the company. The <BR>
> discrepancy between Google's lofty words and its agenda is far too<BR>
> evident: Of course the company is not primarily interested in the <BR>
> freedom of Internet users, but rather in defending its own freedom <BR>
> against any government regulation of its monopoly-like power over the <BR>
> market and public opinion. This raises the question of whether such an <BR>
> approach does more harm than good to its own interests.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Well worth reading the whole article.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> M<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
><BR>
> From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein@gmail.com]<BR>
><BR>
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2012 2:52 AM<BR>
><BR>
> To: 'ciresearchers@vancouvercommunity.net';<BR>
> <a href="mailto:cracin-canada@vancouvercommunity.net">cracin-canada@vancouvercommunity.net</a> <BR>
><BR>
> Subject: FW: Hmmmm... Google: "Internet Freedom!"... (from taxes?<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://delimiter.com.au/2012/11/23/australian-govt-pledges-action-on-g" target="_blank">http://delimiter.com.au/2012/11/23/australian-govt-pledges-action-on-g</a> <BR>
> oogle-tax-avoidance/<BR>
><BR>
> [MG>] <a href="http://tinyurl.com/d9fhmhx" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/d9fhmhx</a> <BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/news/15431664/france-says-google-" target="_blank">http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/news/15431664/france-says-google-</a> <BR>
> would-lose-court-case-over-taxes/<BR>
><BR>
> [MG>] <a href="http://tinyurl.com/c43nfs8" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/c43nfs8</a> <BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://en.apa.az/news_google_italy_suspected_of_tax_evasion__183392.ht" target="_blank">http://en.apa.az/news_google_italy_suspected_of_tax_evasion__183392.ht</a> <BR>
> ml<BR>
><BR>
> [MG>] <a href="http://tinyurl.com/cc4ayk2" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/cc4ayk2</a> <BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://www.3news.co.nz/Starbucks-Google-Amazon-accused-of-UK-tax-evasi" target="_blank">http://www.3news.co.nz/Starbucks-Google-Amazon-accused-of-UK-tax-evasi</a> <BR>
> on/tabid/369/articleID/276457/Default.aspx<BR>
><BR>
> [MG>] <a href="http://tinyurl.com/dylfaxy" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/dylfaxy</a> <BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/23/0156212/australian-govt-pledge" target="_blank">http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/11/23/0156212/australian-govt-pledge</a> <BR>
> s-action-on-google-tax-evasion<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/the-ituwcit-thinking-about-in" target="_blank">http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/the-ituwcit-thinking-about-in</a> <BR>
> ternet-regulatory-policy-from-an-ldc-perspective/<BR>
><BR>
> [MG>] <a href="http://tinyurl.com/8cw6tux" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/8cw6tux</a> <BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <a href="http://tinyurl.com/choul5g" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/choul5g</a> <BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> ____________________________________________________________<BR>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a> <BR>
> To be removed from the list, visit:<BR>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a> <BR>
><BR>
> For all other list information and functions, see:<BR>
> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a> <BR>
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<BR>
> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a> <BR>
><BR>
> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a> <BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<span style="font-family:sans-serif; COLOR: #999999; Font-size:10.0pt">
<hr width="100%">
This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business.
<br><br>
Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244. Email enquiries@analysysmason.com or visit www.analysysmason.com
<hr width="100%">
</span>
</BODY></HTML>