<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Dear Nick<br>
<br>
Some responses below<br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 13 March 2013 11:51 AM,
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:1765453652017989820@unknownmsgid" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<SNIP>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let's accept for the moment that what you say is a true
statement. Why would you see treaty-making as likely to counter
these impacts, given the scenario you posit? In fact, a treaty,
in this case, would be likely to cast in stone the very
inequalities and dangers that you see.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
What do you think of various human rights instruments, that were
globally negotiated, in times much worse than today. How do you
explain them? <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:1765453652017989820@unknownmsgid" type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Treaty-making, in my 20+ years of experience, is largely a
codification of existing practice, not an evolution to create a
new global situation: </div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
I dont think we can right now jump into an ominbus Internet treaty,
and I am not sure it will ever be required/ useful. However, we can
start will trying to put together some higher level Internet
principles. We can also begin to discuss and try to seek solutions,
and as possibly codify them, on emergent issues like cross border
data flows, net neutrality, basic content flow and FoE guarantees,
regulation of global Internet business, global competition policy
frameworks in the Internet space, and so on.<br>
<br>
Before that we can and should try to put together a formal place
where such things can actually be codified (other than, say OECD's
CCICP) in a democratic manner, if and when there is a political will
to do so. But right now the dominant powers, and there numerous
supporters, simply refuse to even allow a UN based space to start
considering these issues, with a <i>possibility</i> of being able
to do something about them. That is the problem right now, and it
cant be pushed away by providing generally pessimistic perspectives
on the world's political capabilities. <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:1765453652017989820@unknownmsgid" type="cite">
<div>governments are simply unwilling to do much that changes
their existing legal system profoundly excepting very rarely and
then only because of a massive external threat or stress - which
the negotiation is designed to deal with. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Nick, you are referring to a classical political dilemma, and human
race has constantly surprised itself by rising above it and acting
collectively in larger public interest. As Hobbes described the
human life as solitary, poor, nasty, <em>brutish</em>,
and <em>short </em>and<em> </em>yet (or because of that), they
could enter into a social contract and organise into political
communities..... Everyone around me sees enough problematic aspects
of how the Internet is evolving, and they are keen that if possible
something should be done about it. Is it not the view of the people
you meet?<br>
<br>
BTW, did you see the latest Hollywood movie on Lincoln, that great
leader of people. Does it not explain how people can actually act
what appears to be against their narrow self interest, for a larger
good. Why else would a bunch of white American together decide to
liberate slaves (the whole movie being about this great phenomenon),
and lose on cheap captive labour, and all great enjoyments of life
that come with it? Can you explain this phenomenon, and I will
explain to you why countries, if put together, can, and will, indeed
work out agreements in public interest.<br>
<br>
parminder
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="LibreOffice 3.5 (Linux)">
<style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm }
P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
-yess</style><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:1765453652017989820@unknownmsgid" type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">What is happening at the larger
social-structural level, and which I consider as the greatest
threat to democracy, is a clear move from public governance,
based on social contract, to private governance, based on
private, interest-based, contracts. And the shift is rather
systemic. It is obviously strongly supported, in fact
instigated, by global capital which finds the biggest challenge
to its domination of all aspects of our lives in the universal
values of equity, fraternity and solidarity, that underlie
public governance systems.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>