[governance] Clinton Admits: "Free" Trade is Harmful to 3rd

[Parminder]

McTim wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>   
> Apart from the many other absurdities implied, you mentioned in your email
>> to Milton that allocation of domain name, IP addresses etc is  a 'natural
>> monopoly' function. Dont you see that civil society is definitionally a
>> social sub-system denoting pluralism, non-rivalrous-ness, non-monopoly
>> etc.... How could an organisation do a 'natural monopoly' function and be
>> civil society?
>>     
>
> the two are not at all mutually exclusive.
>   
They are mutually exclusive. That the point i am making. An entity 
cannot be a civil society entity if it undertakes a monopolistic and 
rivalrous function. If IT for Change is civil society body, then it is 
open for anyone else to do whatever we do. We have no special and 
exclusive right over whatever we may purport to do . That is a civil 
society organisation.
> Do you deny that the root of Internet numbering resources are a
> natural monopoly?  How about names?  If it wasn't then I could have
> itforchange.net, and there would be chaos in terms of who is who.
>   
I thought it was obvious that I was not denying numbering resources are 
a natural monopoly. In fact, on the precise logic that they are not, I 
argued that ICANN cannot be called a civil society body.

Parminder



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100406/5813b8b3/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t