[governance] Net neutrality: Definitions

[Karl Auerbach]

On 08/16/2010 03:12 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
>  In this context, "public internet" is attacked and accused of
> meaninglessness.

Let's not go into your description of statutory interpretation.  The art 
of such interpretation is very dependent upon the jurisdictional and 
factual contexts.

But I don't think we need to go there - I have not been saying that the 
phrase "public internet" is either vague or meaningless.

Quite the contrary.  I am saying that the phrase is not at all vague or 
meaningless.  I am saying that some of us here seem to want to make the 
word "public" in that phrase into an empty word so that the phrase 
"public internet" and the unadorned word "internet" mean the same thing.

People are, of course, free to read statements of policy on neutrality 
on the "public internet" as if those statements apply to the entire 
internet, public or private.

But they ought not to be surprised if someone else, particularly the 
authors of those statements, choose to use those words so that the 
qualifiers "public" and "private" actually mean something.

And it would not be surprising if those policies are read by others such 
that the qualifier "public" is recognized as having weight.

Given that, at least in the USA, well over 90% of the net, and perhaps 
closer to 99%, is owned by private entities, a policy that defines net 
neutrality on a non-privately owned/operated "public internet" would be 
a policy of very limited scope.

		--karl--
____________________________________________________________
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