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

[Dan Krimm]

At 11:58 AM -0200 11/10/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:

>I think that, in our collective discussion, we've abundantly shown that
>things are not black or white, and any attempt to design a single and
>simple principle is immediately subject to a flood of desirable exceptions.
...
>Still, this doesn't solve the problem that these sentiments and
>compromises differ in different parts of the world. As I said, to me the
>real challenge is how to find a way to address the issue "glocally",
>allowing for flexibility while maintaining the uniqueness of the Internet.


I would suggest that whatever issues arise with spam should not muddy the
water when it comes to general *data transport* common carriage (as
distinct from spam filtering), which I think seems quite clear: I suggest
there should be no exceptions to common carriage at the network layer
within an integrated political jurisdiction capable of full direct control
over ex post enforcement of crimes, regardless of what complications might
arise at the application layer.  (And those complications might still be
productively addressed by the edge-power principle, generally.)

If there are any "breaks in the front" regarding handling of spam, then I
would suggest that spam issues should be split off from the data transport
aspect of net neutrality, which is more fundamental and should be allowed
to reach consensus on its own if differences of opinion on spam prove to be
more persistent.

I think the network layer can and should represent a bulwark against
erosion of common carriage, even if the application layer presents more
nuanced complications.  And of course, the principle of protecting the
network layer against ex ante restraint of data transmission for any
carve-outs of criminal violations at the application/content layer, in
favor of ex post enforcement, seems pretty clear as well.

If there *is* to be any violation of net neutrality at the network layer,
it should certainly be confined to borders between sovereign jurisdictions.
And ideally it would be only temporary while jurisdictional cooperation
agreements can be established for ex post enforcement, where appropriate.

(However, I would not suggest that liberal governments accede to
authoritarian governments simply to remove data blockage established by the
latter.  If an authoritarian sovereign chooses to violate net neutrality in
order to oppress its local population, then there is nothing that can be
done to force the long term diplomatic process that might change those
local polices and cause the authoritarian to remove the data block.
Sovereign authoritarian powers have the ability to violate net neutrality
and the rest of the world simply cannot stop them.  But the "free world"
should establish precedents of net neutrality within their own
jurisdictions, and to the extent possible between their jurisdictions
through the construction of processes for effective ex post enforcement of
local criminal violations on their own merits.)

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