[governance] cross-border IG issues

[Lee W McKnight]

Hi,

A couple points:

First in honor of President Hu of China's just concluded US visit, we should remember by far the largest mobile telco - and hence probably largest player in mobile Internet if not already the largest - is China Mobile.
Which is approaching 600m subscribers.  Total Internet subs in China are about 500m.

The increasingly dominant search provider is Baidu, not Google; according to a report from a couple days ago 'Baidu's share of the increasingly lucrative sector hit 75.5 per cent in the last three months of the year, compared with 73 per cent in the third quarter.' That is 4thquarter 2010 numbers.

So point is focusing on US companies alone misses - a lot - of the present global Internet, not just in China.

Second, in regard to charging for priority...that has been widely done for many years, albeit it is usually the content owners/advertisers paying trying to get streams to end users at a higher quality. For example, from Akamai's website: "If you use the Internet for anything - to download music or software, check the headlines, book a flight - you've probably used Akamai's services without even knowing it. We play a critical role in getting content from providers to consumers.

Akamai has created a digital operating environment for the Web. Our global platform of thousands of specially-equipped servers helps the Internet withstand the crush of daily requests for rich, dynamic, and interactive content, transactions, and applications. When delivering on these requests, Akamai detects and avoids Internet problem spots and vulnerabilities, to ensure Websites perform optimally, media and software download flawlessly, and applications perform reliably."

My aim is not to nitpick, and I continue to support a framework convention or other mechanism - like a declaration of Internet Rights and Principles - to strengthen enhanced cooperation/global Internet governance.

In sum, yes there are many cross-border Internet issues; yes the US government and US-based corporations are players, but the framing is - dated - if it misses inclusion of half a billion users and companies that serve them.

And don't notice all the companies paying other companies for priority access - to us end users.

Lee
________________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org [governance-request at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Roland Perry [roland at internetpolicyagency.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 22, 2011 5:10 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] cross-border IG issues

In message <4D3AD5F5.90707 at itforchange.net>, at 18:34:53 on Sat, 22 Jan
2011, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> writes
>Roland Perry wrote:
>  In message <4D3AA246.2080207 at itforchange.net>, at 14:54:22 on Sat,
>  22 Jan 2011, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> writes
>    The fact that all the above mega corporates, as well as ICANN
>>    itself,
>  I thought you were trying to avoid discussions which confuse
>  governance of the infrastructure with governance of the content.
>    are as you say are companies registered in the US is a huge IG
>>    issue. I dont want my personal data to be accessed by anyone
>>    without my consent. And if exceptional conditions of possible
>>    involvement in a crime etc are involved I would have it handled
>>    only by a body/ authority  in whose constitution I have a
>>    democratic role, which regrettably is not the case with the US
>>    gov.
>  Then it is up to you (and those of a like mind) to "vote with your
>  feet" and subscribe to websites run from different jurisdictions.
>  And if you don't think they exist, it's not the Internet
>  infrastructure that's preventing it.
>What do you think is preventing it?

Mainly the first-mover advantage that seems to be very much the hallmark
of famous US-based applications.

>If your response to cross border issues I bring up is to advice cutting
>back to an Internet (or Internets) that fits jurisdictional boundaries,
>it is indeed an internally coherent solution. However, I still think
>that it is possible to preserve a global Internet if we can muster
>enough political  will and courage to develop the necessary global
>political system.

I'd be very happy to see a co-ordinated regulatory framework applied
globally, for issues such as Data Privacy (and disclosure to law
enforcement) and so on. The whole world signed up to the Budapest
Convention!
--
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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

____________________________________________________________
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