[governance] Program for IGC at IGF

[Milton Mueller]

This is an interesting discussion. I find myself agreeing with both Avri
and George. The positions can be reconciled by noting that George is
talking mainly about the relationship between Internet access and the
physical layer (wireless, broadband and other forms of infrastructure
development) whereas Avri is refrring to "the Internet" as a whole which
is of course global in scope and a layer 3 issue.

There is no doubt in my mind that the policies that affect the
availability of physical infrastructure in a country are primarily
national in development and application. And they are affected not only
by national telecom policies, they are powerfully affected by national
economic development policies, for if people have enough money to buy
services lots of infrastructure development issues take care of
themselves more readily, as the Chinese have learned. 



>>> george.sadowsky at attglobal.net 10/22/2006 9:01:20 AM >>>
Avri,

Let's look at access policy _within_ a country, e.g. licensing of 
ISPs, decisions with regard to ISP liability, monopoly telecomm 
carriers, not-level playing fields, licensing of ISPs, licensing of 
wireless frequencies and devices.  etc.  These are all issues of 
national policy.

It may be that international best practices can provide good 
guidelines, but these are more likely to be de facto standards set by 
industry than the result of intergovernmental action.

Perhaps we have different definitions of policy.

George

At 12:04 AM +0200 10/22/06, Avri Doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 21 okt 2006, at 21.11, George Sadowsky wrote:
>
>>What I am reacting to is what I observe is the conventional wisdom 
>>that I find faulty: that Internet governance and related Internet 
>>issues are essentially international in character,
>
>
>I disagree. I think it is only on the international stage that 
>governance and other Internet issues can be dealt.  I don't believe 
>that it is up to governments to do it though i do see them having 
>some role.  i don't believe there is is any right of nations to make 
>policy vis a vis the Internet.  They may do so, and they even get 
>away with it at the moment, but i think we lose a major battle the 
>second we start to believe that they have some _right_ to do so.  I 
>tend to view the IGF and other international, but not 
>intergovernemental, organizations as a bulwark against the 
>continuing nationalization of the Internet.
>
>>that wanted to emasculate ICANN
>
>interesting image, but i do not see what being masculine, or having 
>masculine external attributes, has to do with being an effective 
>international organization.  not that i am prepared to argue that 
>the current ICANN incarnation is particularly effective, though i 
>think that has more to do with its form of governance and its lack 
>of freedom from national and other government pressure.
>
>a.
>____________________________________________________________
>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org 
>To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org 
>
>For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org 
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org 

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance