[governance] Another view on TLDs

[Norbert Bollow]

Karl Auerbach <karl at cavebear.com> wrote:

> You suggest that (in the case of .xxx) that the potential blocking of a 
> TLD by some countries turns TLD semantics into a technical issue.  I 
> find that rather a stretch of logic and would argue that such blocking 
> is a local matter that should have no effect on global internet 
> governance, just as international flight rules are not affected because 
> some nations might deny landing rights to aircraft bearing tail logos 
> they find offensive.

Hmm... my main concern about .xxx is that blocking .xxx could turn out
to be what could sets political processes in motion down the slippery
slope towards content censorship.

If the fundamental technical objective of aircraft design is "ensure
that unless someone dies for reasons which are totally independent of
being abord the aircraft, everyone abord the plane will still be alive
when it has landed", I would say that the corresponding fundamental
goal of the internet is "if two people A and B are connected to the
'net, and A wants to communicate some data to B, and B wants to
receive the data from A, they are able to do so without fear of
censorship".  I don't really care whether or not we call this goal
"technical", or whether violations of this principle are called
"technical issues" or not.  What I care about is that this ability to
communicate without fear of censorship should be considered one of the
fundamental objectives of "internet governance".

> I would suggest that we take care to hew close to technology and be 
> careful not to characterize social and economic matters as technological 
> matters in order to slip them into the tent.  Otherwise there are few 
> limits to what could be done under the heading *internet* governance.

I agree with you that not all internet-related social and economic
matters should be considered to fall under the "internet governance"
heading.

For example, even though I certainly admit that gender issues in
relation to internet access are definitely important issues in many
countries, I do not agree with the idea of discussing those issues
under the "internet governance" heading.

Clearly, a boundary line needs to be drawn or recognized somewhere.

However, in the context of internet governance, the distinction
between "technological matters" on one hand, and "social and economic
matters" on the other hand (which ICANN has claimed to make and then
failed to uphold) is in my opinion not the exactly right place to draw
that boundary.

Greetings,
Norbert.


-- 
Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch>                    http://Norbert.ch
President of the Swiss Internet User Group SIUG  http://SIUG.ch
____________________________________________________________
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