<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Milton<br>
<br>
Your email below makes some very important points. Will respond to
few of them now, and others in a while....<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 04 April 2013 02:32 AM,
Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 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";
color:black;}
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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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"><snip><span
style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""></span><span
style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">It
is not just about "public representation" because that may
imply a standard legislative structure with traditional
forms of political authority but expanded, frighteningly, to
a global scope. There are large parts of the internet,
possibly all of it, that should not be governed via that
paradigm at all.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">So
there are a wide variety of new institutional mechanisms for
aggregating users and suppliers into policy making
processes, such as networked cooperation among ISPs, the
mechanisms used by RIRs to elect their ACs and Boards, <br>
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Aggregation of user and suppliers based governance mechanism can
addressed some limited issues, they are quite inappropriate for
larger public policy resolution, certainly very much so when
political economy considerations are involved. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<snip><span
style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""></span><span
style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">We
may have a conceptual disconnect here if, when you talk
about "representatives of the global public," you are
talking about a single, hierarchical global legislative -
regulatory agency that covers all aspects of "the internet."
No system of representation is going to make that a good
idea.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
Not necessarily.... it can and should be much more complex -
federated, distributed and networked in different forms.... for
instance I agree that the ICANN system need not be replaced, but
merely evolved, for CIR management functions. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">
To me it is first a question of what authority the process
has, how it gets that authority and how it is scoped, the
degree to which it is voluntary or hierarchical, subject to
market discipline, or choice, or not. Those things are
primary. Then you can tackle questions about representation.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Governance systems to be subject first to principles of (1) 'degree
to which it is voluntary' and (2) 'market discipline' before one can
tackle 'questions of representation' is one of the clearest
statements of neoliberal governace that I have seen here in some
time . No, I dont agree to this basic political philosophy, and I
understand that most of our differences come from this basic
disagreement. Basic equity and social justice cannot be obtained for
this world through voluntary governance systems subject primarily to
market discipline. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">But
to give you a more specific response, I was and still am an
advocate of publicly elected ICANN board members. I see no
reason why simple electoral democracy, with some structural
safeguards such as regional distribution, should not be used
for the board. The standard risks and problems with direct
democracy are limited because of the limited scope of
ICANN's authority. ICANN would still need a better
"constitution" delimiting its authority, and it may well be
that the best place to get that constitution in the current
world is from an intergovernmental process involving
international law with MS participation in its negotiation.
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Agree. I think the basic ICANN system should stay as it is, with its
larger remit and policy directions provided by international law.
What you are proposing is a kind of an inter government convention
arrived at with multi stakeholder participation, for instance the
manner in which the recent UN convention on disability was arrived
at... Lets work on this area of possible agreement. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">And
not all MS participation has to be "representative" - it can
also be organized along the lines of the traditional
Internet institutions, i.e., open participation by
individuals who represent only themselves. Indeed, as a
principle the governing well-defined sectors that require
specialized knowledge, that can be a very good method.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Specialised knowledge based governance is appropriate only for some
narrow technical areas, like in the IETF.... larger political
governance is based on representation and not 'knowledge' . <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif""><br>
</span><span
style="font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">All
businesses should be expropriated and replaced by the
dictatorship of the public interest advocates, in line with
the precepts of Parminder-Gurstein thought! <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Just
kidding.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">(Had
you there for a moment, no?)</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
In fact the opposite is true. The current paradigm of democratic
systems, as practised by most democracies, allow a range of
political philosophies to find expression, and possible obtain
'political power'. Rightist as well as leftist groups can come to
power and exercise respective political philosophies. However the
kind of voluntary and apriori market discipline based (whatever it
means) systems that you advocate locks-in the 'Milton' variety of
political thinking for ever, in an irreplaceable way.... that is
neo-liberal dictatorship - much more insidious in many ways than the
traditional dictatorhsips - where at least the 'enemy' and thus the
target of change was rather clear..... Here, in neolib dictatorship
it is rather more complex and hidden, networked, if you like it that
way :)....<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Not
all governance is about voting. Markets are a form of
governance, one that works well in many, many contexts.
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Well, that kind of conceptual/ category elasticity is not very
useful... That way everything is in some measure everything else.
Many in fact see political governance as the other of 'markets' and
thus complimentary to each other in human affairs, rather than one
being a form of other.... Sorry, that is simply pushing the above
neolib form of governance thing. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Where
general public input is needed, the "open participation by
individuals" paradigm does not need to distinguish
representation by status. I do not favor corporatist models
that try to assign a certain number of representative slots
to people based on some category such as "business," "labor"
"civil society" or whatever.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Agree. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">However,
some aspects of governance _<i>can</i>_ actually best be
governed through industry associations where there is a
direct alignment between the economic stakes of the actors
and the effectiveness of the overall system. The
administration of credit card number assignments, for
example, is handled perfectly well by a self-governing
industry association. Of course, it is also possible that
such systems become cartels or have other adverse public
interest effects and need to be broken up or regulated
opened up to broader public participation.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i>I have some problem with the WSIS
'respective role' definition but not going to the extent
of claiming that all stakeholders have the same claim to
policy making process. Do you say that they an equal role?
If not what differential role do you see? </i></b><b><i><span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:5.25pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">My
point of reference, again, is the individual. In that
respect all individuals are equal.
</span><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Important point, and I agree. MS-ists may please note. <br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:5.25pt">
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i>Then perhaps US congress' decisions
taken without consulting your university may also be
considered non binding by your university.
</i></b><b><i><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">No,
because we live under the political authority of the US
federal government and have some opportunity to participate
in selecting the congress's members. I do not, however, have
any representation in the 30 African governments, dozens of
European governments, China, Asian countries, etc. who
negotiated the WSIS documents.
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Oh, really! :) / And what about lack of representation of all the
people from all non US countries in so much in this world that gets
done unilaterally by the US government. <br>
.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is interesting. From below, I
understand that by new institutions you mean ICANN, RIR etc. I
agree with the existing policy making role of these
institutions, and most developing countires like India also
agree.... I think it is extremely important we dont confuse
narrow technical policy role with larger public policy role in
non tech areas like net neutrality, data protection and
privacy, ecommerce taxation, cyber security and so on... Are
you saying that these new institutions - ICANN etc - should
have a role in these latter policy areas as well.<span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">No.
their mandate should remain limited.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Most
of the issues you list can be handled via standard national
regulatory processes. Certainly NN can be and is being so
handled. The one clear exception might be cybersecurity, we
may need new institutional arramgenets for that; privacy/dp
may also be an exception, although there are extensive and
quite vigorous national and supra-national regulatory
institutions (EC) around that so it probably is not an
exception.
</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
A Council of Europe document, in preparing which Wolfgang and
Bertrand participated, lays out of a lot of Internet related public
policy issues that are indeed, and somewhat inherently, global .
This will be much more so when the cloud computing paradigm fully
takes over. We cannot wipe out this patent fact for political
convenience. That is what the process of 'enhanced cooperation' is
all about. How does the world collectively address these pressing
global policy issues. And real doable insitutional proposals are
needed, becuase the problems that are faced are here and now, and
rather severe.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD23A30C6@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, we should stand against any form of
arbitrary interventions in legitimate areas of technical
policy making by the ICANN system - and the root signing
authority of the US government and ICANN's answerability to US
jurisdiction today are the two most significant levers for
such 'arbitrary' intervention. <span style="color:#1F497D">
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Agreed.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in
0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Again , pl
propose your model. It is difficult to just stand up in the
Working Group and say, we want it trans-nationalised, but
right now we are not sure what is looks like practically.
During preceding discussions I had suggested a few options.<span
style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">By
"Again," are you referring to the fact that you've asked me
this question about 3 times before and I have put before you
a fairly detailed proposal in response each time, based on
the IGP response to the 2009 NTIA RFC?? Forgive me if I pass
up another round.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>