Extending Rights to the Internet: (Was RE: [governance] Example of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism -
Michael Gurstein
gurstein at gmail.com
Thu Nov 26 12:36:59 EST 2009
Thanks Meryem,
I agree with your reformulation of my rather awkward initial formulation...
My one caveat (and here I'm again demonstrating my lack of familiarity with
the "Rights" discourse) is that the statement "access to the Internet as a
necessary requirement for the full exercize of democracy" seems to me rather
too narrow in that one could add/substitute
"development"/"health"/"education"/and so on for your terminology of
"democracy".
Meryem: "I would rather state it differently: access to the Internet as a
necessary requirement for the full exercize of democracy and one's
fundamental right requires that there are accessible tools that allow for or
facilitate the use of the Internet."
Mike
From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:meryem at marzouki.info]
Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 8:54 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Example of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism -
Hi all,
I agree with Carlos and Bill here. Even beyond this discussion, it's
strange how often I've seen recently people - or organizations -
speaking of consumer rights as human rights (i.e. fundamental rights). The
fact that there exist national, regional, international
legislation giving rights to consumers (w.r.t. to goods and services
providers) does certainly not mean that this is a fundamental right!
Regarding Michael's interpretation that: "If access to the Internet
is a necessary requirement for participation in an "Information
Society" then access to the tools that allow for or facilitate the
use of the Internet especially when those tools are linked into some
sort of monopolistic position with respect to the use of the Internet
should surely fall under that rubric.", I would rather state it
differently: access to the Internet as a necessary requirement for
the full exercize of democracy and one's fundamental right requires
that there are accessible tools that allow for or facilitate the use
of the Internet". In other words, the requirement is not to access
tools provided in a monopolistic position, but that there should be
no monopolies, i.e. alternative tools should exist and be accessible,
allowing access to and production of information as well as full
participation.
Going back to Fouad's initial example: the point is not that Amazon's
Kindle software for PC is not accessible in Pakistan (though it might
be an inconvenience for some), but rather that you couldn't read a
given book unless using Amazon's Kindle software for PC. Which is not
the case, apparently, since I can read the mentioned report (http://
report.knightcomm.org/) through other means, e.g. with my browser, on
a MacIntosh, connected from Paris.
Conclusion: it's a pure (and minor, I would say but this is a
personal opinion) consumer issue: someone wants to buy a product
which is not available in his/her country. See Bill's problem in
getting good Mexican food in Geneva, which those who know Bill would
qualify as a much more preoccupying problem;))
Best,
Meryem
Le 26 nov. 09 à 14:30, Carlos A. Afonso a écrit :
> Wow, what a strange discussion. Let's contribute to it: how about
> iTunes
> or AppleTV only working in developed countries (one cannot purchase
> media without having a credit card account in the USA or some other
> developed country)? How about only now Sony introduces the PS2
> (PS2, an
> obsolete gadget) in Brazil, and has no plans to introduce the PS3?
>
> I think the whole discussion is biased by a focus on being able to
> consume (superfluous or not) stuff anywhere, whatever the big
> companies
> create to make us think we have to have it.
>
> --c.a.
>
> McTim wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:18 AM, William Drake
>> <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch> wrote:
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> On Nov 25, 2009, at 6:50 PM, Michael Gurstein wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think that Bill's casual dismissal of this issue is not
>>>> appropriate.
>>> There's a difference between disagreeing with something and being
>>> inappropriate.
>>>> The logic here is surely the same as the overall logic of a
>>>> "Right to the
>>>> Internet" (remembering that I claim no expertise in the domain
>>>> of discussion
>>>> around "Rights"...
>>> Really? "Right to the Internet" is the same as declaring any
>>> company that doesn't sell a product in a given country to be
>>> "authoritarian."? Sorry, but this strikes me as fuzzy logic, and
>>> not the computer science kind.
>>>
>>> It used to be that when a transnational firm entered a developing
>>> country's market folks of certain persuasions would decry this as
>>> imperialist etc. But now if a firm does not enter a market we
>>> can also call them names normally associated with governments
>>> that brutalize their populations to retain political power?
>>> Maybe you should notify all the groups working against WTO
>>> agreements etc that they have it backwards and are promoting
>>> authoritarianism, whereas what they really should be doing is
>>> demanding that every company everywhere be required to sell
>>> everything everywhere else.
>>>
>>> Fouad says Amazon is authoritarian because it "dictates who buys
>>> or isn't allowed to buy from its website;" presumably, this would
>>> apply to other companies and distribution channels as well.
>>> Let's leave aside the many reasons why a company might not serve
>>> a given market---costs, level of effective demand, distribution,
>>> local partner requirements, regulatory/policy uncertainty/
>>> unfavorability, the prospects of fraud (as Carlton notes), etc
>>> etc---since I guess normal business considerations don't matter.
>>> All that does by Fouad's standard is can I buy what I want, and
>>> if not, they're equivalent with, say, the Burmese junta.
>>>
>>> I can't get real Mexican food at Geneva grocery stores. I
>>> couldn't buy a Coke at the Sharm airport, only Pepsi. I can't
>>> watch most US TV shows over the net in Switzerland. I can't see
>>> most non-Hollywood US films, e.g. indies, at Geneva movie
>>> theaters. But I want these things. So am I a victim of
>>> authoritarianism?
>>>
>>> I'm sorry to hear that Kindle for PC is not currently available
>>> in Pakistan. Perhaps it would make sense to actually find out
>>> why this is so and see if anything can be done to encourage
>>> change? Might be more productive than misplaced sloganeering.
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> I knew if I waited long enough, someone would spend the time to
>> say this!
>>
>> BTW, Fouad, can you not use a proxy service?
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Carlos A. Afonso
> CGI.br (www.cgi.br)
> Nupef (www.nupef.org.br)
> ====================================
> new/nuevo/novo e-mail: ca at cafonso.ca
> ====================================
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
More information about the Governance
mailing list