[governance] IGP Alert: "Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance"

[Dan Krimm]

Interesting, I have not directly received the email response I sent out at
13:30 pm PST, though I see from the web interface that it has been posted
to the list, and I see Milton's later response.

Apparently some algorithm running between the listserv and my email server
decided that this conversation was to be filtered out (presumably as
"spam").  Too many references to a certain "offensive" subject matter, I
guess.  I don't know how many people received it.

Or maybe I was just too long-winded...  ;-)

So, with respect to:

>Ok, I've not read the paper yet, but here is the Usual Question: let's
>say that the government of XYZland wants to prohibit access to [certain]
>content to its citizens, would that be inhibited by your
>definition of network neutrality?

Bottom line: what Milton said.

In my own words:  "The distilled (if not simple) answer is that laws to
establish prior restraint on data transport (if that's what you mean by
"prohibit access") would violate net neutrality, but laws to prosecute
carve-outs from freedom of expression ex post ("prohibit distribution")
would not.  Under ex post rules, common carriers are not liable for
distribution of unlawful content over their platforms."  [And to be clear,
net neutrality is a form of common carriage, which has very deep roots in
English Common Law.]

And:  "Punish the content provider, not the network operator, and don't
impose pre-filtering on the network itself, except perhaps at the edges
(not on the pipes)."

Dan
____________________________________________________________
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