<html>
<body>
Dear Milton,<br><br>
No one can answer your question because it is based on a false premise.
<br><br>
This premise is the US BUG. If you pose as a premise that you can
"Be Unilaterally Global", and managed to make the world believe
your way of using the technology is the single possible one, you
certainly have an influence if your propositions looks acceptable
(capable is another issue :-)). However, this influence is obtained by
the rule of necessity. And as I said elsewhere necessity is mother of
invention. <br><br>
In our digital network area, the US industry has succeeded in making the
world's people believe that its root centered networking was a necessity.
It is now up to us, the people, the Libre engineers, the IUsers to make
obvious to everyone that digitality, by its very essence, is not centered
and they are free to chose the laws they voted rather than the laws
lobbied by the US corporations.<br><br>
I know, it will take time. And bigTrans National Corporations will
resist. However, a few steps a head have already occured since IEN 48 was
frozen by the status-quo strategy. The architectural vision has been
better defined; software programming has matured; new datacommunications
technologies are emerging; RFC 6852 is uncomplete but has been signed;
the world in Dubai has voted "no". Snowden was used to trigger
Montevideo, Sao Paulo and Geneva. Next date is Sept 30, 2015. One year to
go. One year for the Libre MYCANN-plug-in to be explored, discussed,
developped, tested and deployed. Tight schedule, for a few people ...
<a href="http://mycann.org/" eudora="autourl">http://mycann.org</a>. You
are welcome to join on
<a href="http://0net.org/" eudora="autourl">http://0net.org</a>.
<br><br>
One year to go .... until Oct. 1st, 2015. ICANN or not ICANN will then be
the question.<br><br>
jfc<br><br>
<br>
At 22:50 30/09/2014, Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Content-Language: en-US<br>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
boundary="_000_b3d1154ec4094871a651da67b8305203EX13MBX13adsyredu_"<br>
<br>
<a name="_MailEndCompose"></a> <br>
Now, why, when the UN can adopt a Model law of e-commerce, can we not
discuss and possibly adopt a Model Law on IP based
telecommunication and net neutrality. Can anyone answer this simple
and obvious question for me? Please, I am serious. <br>
<br>
No one can answer this question because it is based on a false
premise. But you provided your own answer anyway: <br>
<br>
>Because US tell us so. And so many of us are happy to take our <br>
> cues from the US, and its political and corporate allies. (Has it
<br>
> anything to do with from where the money flows?) <br>
<br>
It is based on a false premise because: <br>
<br>
Here in the US of A, we are talking about nothing else but a new law
and/or regulation on net neutrality, it got 5 million public comments.
And the same federal regulatory agency, known as the FCC, has been
running a proceeding on the telephony-to-IP transition since January
<a href="https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-14-5A1.pdf">
https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-14-5A1.pdf</a> <br>
<br>
The dialogue you say doesn’t exist is transnational. I was under the
impression that there were half a dozen workshops on net neutrality at
this year’s IGF. I believe that the topic was debated extensively, if
inconclusively, at Netmundial. The European Commission has also been
discussing and acting on it. <br>
<br>
The word “net neutrality” is an American term and the current
Presidential administration is on record as supporting it. You probably
learned the words “IP transition” from America, too. So explain to me
again how the evil empire is preventing everyone from talking about such
laws or regulations?? I am serious, or at least as serious as one can be
when dealing with outlandish accusations. <br>
<br>
Is the basis of your political appeal now a shopworn anti-Americanism,
rather than a policy agenda that actually makes things better?<br>
<br>
Keep in mind that “model laws” developed by the UN are significant
only insofar as they are adopted by national governments. Which means,
they have limited relevance when it comes to global Internet governance
issues. <br>
<br>
As a thought experiment, ask yourself which has had more influence and
importance to the future of the Internet: the UNCITRAL model e commerce
law?
<a href="http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/electronic_commerce/1996Model.html">
http://www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/electronic_commerce/1996Model.html</a>
<br>
Or the Clinton administration’s Framework for Global Electronic
Commerce, which provided the rationale for ICANN?
<a href="http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/Commerce/">
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/Commerce/</a> <br>
<br>
If the latter proved more influential, is it because the evil empire
stopped everyone from talking about the topic and used Jedi mind tricks
to force it down our throats? Or was it because a globalized approach
proved to be more practical and suitable to the growth of the internet
than a fragmented, nation-based approach? <br>
<br>
If the neoliberal telecom competition and deregulation policies won out
in the 1980s and 1990s, was it because of US power, or was it because the
policies were fantastically successful at stimulating the growth and
penetration of the Internet and information and telecom services and
equipment, more so than the 70 years of national monopoly that preceded
it, and thus were imitated by country after country?<br>
<br>
These might be more “serious” and productive questions for people on
this list to answer<br>
<br>
Milton L Mueller<br>
Laura J. and L. Douglas Meredith Professor<br>
Syracuse University School of Information Studies<br>
<a href="http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/">
http://faculty.ischool.syr.edu/mueller/</a><br>
Internet Governance Project<br>
<a href="http://internetgovernance.org/">http://internetgovernance.org</a>
<br>
<br>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit<br>
Content-Disposition: inline;
filename="message-footer.txt"<br><br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
governance@lists.igcaucus.org<br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" eudora="autourl">
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" eudora="autourl">
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/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br><br>
Translate this email:
<a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" eudora="autourl">
http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></blockquote></body>
</html>