Extending Rights to the Internet: (Was RE: [governance] Example
Parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Fri Nov 27 09:43:59 EST 2009
Meryem
I started my email by saying we may not want to use the terms
'authoritarianism' or 'human rights' here.
The reference to Mexican food in Geneva came after a round where the
term 'authoritarian' had been kind of muted out of the discussion, and
Micheal had made a clear case of '/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".
/ Speaking of Mexican food in Geneva in this context, and also with new
examples like paypal being added to the kindle one, is in my view
insensitive and inconsiderate to the basic set of concerns being expressed.
Also, at least i did not say 'authoritarian nonsense' :) ...
In the global digital space, which is a new global social space, private
monopolistic controls are a huge issue, perhaps 'the' issue, and it is
obvious that this is what was being discussed at this stage, along with
corresponding issue of debilitating exclusions..
I would not consider non-availability of one set of goods or others in
a country as a comparable example. What is more comparable is what I
found to some shock when I visited Iran a few years back. Credit cards
do not work there because the companies are mostly US and they follow a
kind of embargo. Many people came to meeting I went for without enough
cash, and they had to use credit cards in black (illegal overseas
transactions) to get cash. And of course normal business in Iran would
be hugely affected, locally, as well as globally. it is this kind of
basic enabling services that need to be treated at a very different
level than simple goods. And as digital world gets more and more
enmeshed in our lives, these monopolies, and imperialistic powers behind
it, is the issue at stake, and begins discussed. Correspondingly, it is
the deep exclusions and new dependencies that will develop that are of
concern.
I know you do agree to these concerns generally, but do not agree to
frame them as a human rights issue. I can agree. But when you say, it
may not be even be an issue of 'consumer rights' i may not agree. As you
said in an earlier email, it may not be so much that I want to use a
particular commercial software as a right, as of open standards and
inter-interoperability with local options that can be developed. That is
a certainly a huge consumer right issue.
Best, Parminder
/
/
Meryem Marzouki wrote:
> Parminder,
>
> I fully agree with you that regulation of giant corporates - not only
> at global but also at regional and national levesl in countries where
> they operate or have subsidiaries - as you formulate it is an issue of
> foremost importance and that it is much needed. This issue has in
> addition to be dealt with in various fora and framework, not only
> those related to Internet governance, as the "Proposal for a WTO
> Agreement on the Supply of Knowledge as a Global Public Good" example
> forwarded by Michael shows.
>
> However, it's not fair to interpret as "inappropriate",
> "inconsiderate", and "a smack of insensitivity" an - ironical, I admit
> - comment of the very specific and minor consumer issue as the one
> brought by Fouad with the example of Amazon Kindle software for PC not
> being available in Pakistan. By minor, I mean that it's an
> inconvenience, not a violation of human rights nor an obstacle to
> development, not even a breach of any consumer rights (consumer rights
> does not include any "right to consume").
>
> The irony of the comment (comparison with unavailabity of good Mexican
> food in Geneva) was simply proportional to the exageration in calling
> "authoritarianism" the fact that a given commercial product is not
> available in a given country. Words matter, because they express
> concepts and there unadequate use might lead to the dilution of these
> concepts and the softening of problems that really matter, by equating
> them to minor issues. I am sure this was certainly not Fouad's
> intention, but we should be cautious on this kind of process: they are
> intentionally used far too often, and it's so easy to get traped.
>
> I lived during the first 25 years of my life in Tunisia, my other
> country of culture and citizenship and my country of birth, still have
> family there and visit them regularly. You cannot imagine the number
> of goods and services that are not available there (not even speaking
> of affordability), for various reasons: market not wide enough for
> some goods or services, too expensive or not worth to be imported (the
> Tunisian Dinar is not quoted on the international currency market) and
> many other commercial or financial reasons as already suggested in
> this discussion. Conversely, there are also Tunisian goods and
> services that I cannot find elsewhere in the world. Too bad, but so what?
>
> As far as I'm concerned, I keep the word 'authoritarianism' for cases
> when, e.g. a book cannot be found in Tunisia (or is taken by the
> police in your luggage when you enter the country) for censorship
> reasons, not when I cannot find it easily in any Tunisian bookshop
> simply because no one besides me would be interested in reading (and
> thus buying) it.
>
> Best,
> Meryem
>
> Le 27 nov. 09 à 13:30, Parminder a écrit :
>
>> Hi All
>>
>> Getting late into something which as Carlos said is an interesting
>> discussion...
>>
>> Even if we agree to not apply the terms authoritarianism and human
>> rights here, the underlying issue is of great importance suggesting
>> urgent need for global Internet policy making, and developing
>> institutions that are adequate to that purpose. The issue also
>> suggests that existing global policy institutions do not cover a good
>> deal of new ground that is opened up with this global phenomenon of
>> Internet becoming an important part of more and more aspects of our
>> social lives...
>>
>> It is fine to say that this is a consumer rights issue, and i agree
>> with Meryem that the real issue is that there should be enough
>> alternative software/ devices and interoperability should be
>> ensured... But the point is, who ensures that. Economically less
>> powerful (developing) countries do not have the muscle to regulate
>> these unprecedentedly huge global digital companies, and so they
>> have to simply submit. The developed countries often see strong
>> economic interest in not disturbing the 'imperialist' designs of
>> these companies which are almost all based in these countries and
>> bring them a lot of economic benefits and sustaining advantage (the
>> framework of a new wave of neo-imperialism).
>>
>> Who then regulates these giant corporates, whose power now rivals
>> that of many states? There seem to be a clear and strong tendency,
>> shared by much of civil society in the developed world - IGC not
>> being immune to it - that Internet (and its digital ecosystem) should
>> be left unregulated, mostly. At least there seems to be no urgency to
>> do anything about global Internet policy arena. The fear of statist
>> control on the Internet has become all that ever counts in any
>> discussion on global Internet governance/ policy-making. (This has
>> become almost a red-herring now.) This is problematic for developing
>> countries, and to the collective interests of the people of these
>> countries, (the right to development) which are in great danger of
>> losing out as the (non-level) digital playground is being set out,
>> without due regulation in global public interest. To get the right
>> global governance institutions and outcomes to address this vital
>> issue, in my opinion, is what should centrally constitute the
>> 'development agenda in IG'.
>>
>> I would consider it very inappropriate, and very inconsiderate, to
>> compare such real problems that developing counties increasingly
>> face, and will face in future to an even greater extent, like the
>> non-availability of 'basic' and enabling software like e-readers,
>> with non-availability of Mexican food in Geneva... It is even more
>> inappropriate to speak of people of 'certain persuasion' who in WTO
>> arena oppose certain multinational invasion of unprotected markets
>> in developing countries, as being a sentiment and act in opposition
>> to raising the issues of necessary provision of basic enabling
>> software/ devices on fair and open standard terms to people of
>> developing countries. Our organization has joined protests on many
>> WTO issues, but do clearly sympathize with the present issue under
>> consideration. They proceed from very different logics, but have a
>> convergence in the fact that (1) global economy (and society) have
>> to regulated in global public interest , and (2) the interest of
>> developing countries is often different from that of developed
>> countries. Appropriate global regulatory and governance systems have
>> to be built which take into account these differentials, without
>> being formulaic about it. That in my understanding constitutes the
>> development agenda in global forums.
>>
>> Many other examples of commercial digital services have been given -
>> like paypal etc - denial of which can have a very strong
>> exclusionary effect of people and groups... Exclusion has to be seen
>> and addressed in its real, felt forms and not by simplistic
>> comparisons, which smack of insensitivity.
>>
>> Think of Microsoft suddenly refusing to give Windows related services
>> to a country (I know many would take it as a blessing, but there are
>> strong issue there still), or Skype not being available in a country
>> which would cut its residents off many a global tele-meetings
>> (including civil society ones). Or, Google, especially after it has
>> all of us doing every second online activity on its platform, cutting
>> off its services to a country... this surely isnt about Mexican food
>> in Geneva.
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>>
>> Michael Gurstein wrote:
>>> Bien sur!
>>>
>>> M
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:meryem at marzouki.info]
>>> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 10:35 AM
>>> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>> Subject: Re: Extending Rights to the Internet: (Was RE: [governance] Example
>>> of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism -
>>>
>>>
>>> My English skills probably need improvement:
>>> First of all, it's not about participating in *a* debate, but
>>> participating in *the democratic debate* (this means, at least in
>>> French, full democratic participation).
>>> Second, it's about the "full exercize of democracy and of one's
>>> fundamental rights", which means full democratic participation AND
>>> full exercize of fundamental rights". To my knowledge, education/
>>> health/development are part of fundamental rights, aren't they? Meryem
>>>
>>> Le 26 nov. 09 à 19:03, Michael Gurstein a écrit :
>>>
>>>
>>>> But opportunities to "participate in a debate" on something (e.g.
>>>> education/health/development) is rather narrower (and less significant
>>>> certainly) than an opportunity to actually have an
>>>> education/health/development, or have I missed something.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:meryem at marzouki.info]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 9:52 AM
>>>> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Extending Rights to the Internet: (Was RE:
>>>> [governance] Example
>>>> of Corporate Internet Authoritarianism -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Mike,
>>>>
>>>> I thought this was covered by the "and one's fundamental rights" in
>>>> the second part of the sentence. By "full exercize of democracy" I
>>>> meant in this context participation in the democratic debate.
>>>>
>>>> Le 26 nov. 09 à 18:36, Michael Gurstein a écrit :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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 <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>> governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>> <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>>
>> For all list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20091127/1221ecb7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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