[governance] Losing focus: IGF and "technical discussions"

[Seiiti Arata]

Vittorio, friends,

Now that the time to hurry up and finish our drafts for the WSIS
process has passed and we have recovered from New Year celebrations
(including Chinese and Orthodox Russian calendars), I think this is an
appropriate time to raise a controversial point with less risk of
"losing focus" (and I think that as Diplo's event is coming just
before the open consultations, this is actually to get more theorical
once again):

I do agree with you that the IGF tends (happily) to take IG
discussions beyond the narrow names-and-numbers level. But we must
also take into account that other technical decisions have high policy
impact, such as protocols and standards setting (de facto and also
formal official ones).

Some of these are still developed by the IETF (which may now need to
receive extra visibility and a higher governance level), but others
are also being imposed by cable broadband ISPs, which limit many
freedoms of the users (see, e.g. Michael Geist article Towards a
Two-Tier Internet -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4552138.stm). Some of these ISPs
are privileging transport of certain packets of data, contrary to the
neutrality principle. Parallel to this, more and more the discussions
of security tend to change the end-to-end architecture.

But even focusing on the architecture of the network may seem too
naïve. Maybe Internet governance issues should also encompass a
certain general ICT governance, by including computer design for
example as one important issue to consider. Jonathan Zittrain has
published a paper of fundamental importance on this line of thought,
arguing that by insisting in having an end-to-end network will lead to
power-seeking actors targeting efforts to place limitations in the
computers in the ends. (see Zittrain on The Generative Internet -
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=847124)

The new paradigm of software as a service and not as a product also
tends to have regulatory impact by constant live updates changing the
software code enabling or prohibiting certain uses. The trusted
computing initiative similarly tends to change the wide range of
applications of computing power.

A disclaimer: Here, I am not defending neither the rise of the
intelligent network nor calling for support of the end-to-end
principle. They all have benefits and negative impacts. I just propose
that the IGF shall play a role in enhancing a wider awareness of the
policy implications of these changes (which by now is still
geek-oriented but more and more incumbent-industry-oriented). A better
governance is needed in the regulation by code. And leaving the market
to "self-regulate" may tend to empower those capable to shift the
architecture of the Internet towards private interests (not
necessarily in harmony with the international public interest).

I will be very happy to share some ideas with you on this list or, if
such discussion may shift focus from the original purpose of this
list, by private email conversations, or even better personally in
Malta and/or Geneva next month.

Fraternal regards (Carlos, did you "patent" this?)
Seiiti

On 1/23/06, Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org> wrote:
> Il giorno dom, 22/01/2006 alle 12.50 +0300, McTim ha scritto:
> > I know I've said this before, but...
> >
> > Whatever is created MUST be better or equal to the best Internet
> > Policy Development Processes that we have now.  It was acknowlwdged by
> > many on the governance caucus list that the RIR policies are the
> > "cleanest" of the ICANN processes.
>
> I agree that RIR processes are quite good, but please don't forget that
> at the IGF we'll not be making technical agreements with policy
> implications, but policy agreements that need to be compatible with
> technology. The set of stakeholders, interests and views that will be
> involved in discussions on, say, privacy, freedom of expression, or
> e-commerce are likely to be much much broader and diverse (and less
> technical) than those involved in names and numbers administration.
> --
> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
>
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance