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

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

> editorial control over what is carried (and deciding what is spam and
> filtering it clearly is editorial control.)

You might want to review 47 USC 230 which does provide safe harbor for such
editorial control, at least in the USA. There are similar provisions in
various countries' antispam laws that encourage providers to filter email.

> Put these two dimensions into a 2x2 matrix and we see that in one of
> the boxes there are providers that do exercise editorial control but have
> no contractual relationship with the receiver.  Those providers are, to my

Er, like?  There are some providers who have contractual relationships with
the ISP that hires them to provide their servers such a service (brightmail,
etc)

> A provider proper mode to induce users to give such permission is to
> raise the costs charged to those users who withhold permission and thus

Not really. Most providers find that the costs of offering an unfiltered
account are actually far higher than offering a filtered account. Not just
bandwidth / disk etc - that is small change. Support costs from users who
get spammed, phished etc and then complain about it?  Do the numbers.

	srs

____________________________________________________________
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