[governance] regulating the digital space - whose laws apply, and whose do not

[McTim]

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:

> Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
> > This is not really true.  As several of my past posts have
> > established, without any contradiction on this particular point, the
> > internet presently (and in the past) relies upon many governmental
> > laws in the form of contract, property, and intellectual property laws
> > to facilitate its expansion (to be sure) and arguably to support its
> > existence as we know it.
>
> I'm sure that I'm not alone in disagreeing with this statement
> as formulated here as well as with your claim that you have
> "established" it. As a clear counter-example, I would point to
> the re-establishment of the Internet in Libya. Also note how
> many core internet governance functions have worked well for a
> long time in the absence of contractual or other legal obligations.
> Also, when such legal frameworks are added to something can work
> reasonably well without them, it is not accurate to claim reliance
> on these legal frameworks. For example, even in the presence of a
> contract between an ISP and a customer, and in a legal environment
> in which enforcing such a contract is possible, it may well be that
> neither side has any need to rely on contract law etc to enforce
> the contract. The ISP can simply stop providing the service if the
> customer does not pay, and customers can stop paying and give the
> ISP a bad reputation if the ISP doesn't fulfil its responsibility.
>
> More generally, Paul, please do not infer from lack of response to
> some aspects of your postings the lack of disagreement or that those
> who disagree do not have (possibly just in their heads) well-founded
> counterarguments. Given the quantities of text that you post, and
> that you speak from a perspective that is very different from that
> of myself and probably most others here (that it itself is not a
> bad thing at all, of course) it is simply impossible to react to
> everything that one disagrees with. Furthermore, given that it is
> necessary to set priorities with regard to which messages and which
> points one reacts to, there are several aspects of your postings
> that give at least me an additional inclination to avoid spending a
> lot of time on corresponding with you: I prefer to correspond
> with those who give me the impression of listening well to what is
> being said, who are able to follow thoughts that don't fit too well
> into a given ideological framework, and who treat everyone who
> participates in the conversation with prefessional courtesy and
> respect.
>


+1 to all of the above.

At heart, the Internet is the suite of protocols and standards that allow
networks to communicate.  These have never legislated.

It's the services that run over these networks and the resulting
epiphenomenon that so many seem hell bent on regulating.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110829/daf3dfe8/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, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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