[governance] FW: TP: city government exercising policy on Google Applications / consumer rights / Consumer Protection Act / trial period

[michael gurstein]

Since I started this most interesting discussion by forwarding the original
message concerning the actions by the Taipei municipality I reserve the
right to speak for myself (tks for your kindness in placing words in my
mouth MM...

I forwarded the original message not because I supported that Municipality,
I don't know enough about the circumstances there to offer a useful opinion
and certainly subjecting corporations or anyone to local ordinances etc.etc.
is broadly an absurdity except for those directly resident or with a
significant presence locally (vagueness in definition here deliberate);
rather I sent it along as an example of the kind of dilemmas that the
Internet presents in the context of governance regimes--local, national, and
global.

What should be clear to all sides of this discussion is that some sort of
governance (including taxation) regime that responds to the unique
charactetistics of the Internet is necessary and the success of the Internet
makes that even more significant and the urgency even greater. 

If we start from there and avoid misattributions  of words/opinions etc. we
might even make a useful contribution to the overall discussion on this
which regrettably has been very slow in developing, mixed up with national
short term self-interests and corporate reluctance to have anyone have an
overview let alone a position of authority where their super-growth and
super-profits might come under direct scrutiny.

MG

-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Milton L Mueller
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2011 9:46 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Paul Lehto'; Daniel Kalchev
Subject: RE: [governance] FW: TP: city government exercising policy on
Google Applications / consumer rights / Consumer Protection Act / trial
period




> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> 
> The internet originated in governmental efforts

Internet protocol (TCP/IP) was developed with governmental research funding,
not "the Internet." "The Internet" infrastructure was developed, as Daniel
correctly notes, by private network operators building things and
interconnecting with it. And the reason it succeeded was because it was an
open protocol, not owned. I.e., it was the ABSENCE of control, not its
presence, that made it successful.

> and could not exist
> without the robust legal infrastructure and some physical 
> infrastructure provided by governments.

Bollocks. This whole line of argument is just silly. Some local government
provides a road for a truck to ride on and that means it has an unqualified
right to regulate anything and everything that happens in global
communications? What kind of an argument is this? 

Sure, insofar as governments secure basic property rights and contractual
rights and administer justice, a  "legal infrastructure" has been helpful.
But just as often, govts overstep those bounds and try to obstruct,
parasitize, over-regulate or overtax. We need to debate the merits of a
specific intervention; this argument makes no sense in the abstract. 

So please, stay on point and tell me why a specific locality in Taiwan
should be able to tax and assert regulatory power over an app provider in
California;, tell me what benefit accrues and how such taxation without
representation is consistent with democratic principles. And tell me - as
Parminder, Lee, Michael and others keep ducking the issue - how it is
practically feasible to have 100,000 different jurisdictions come bearing
down on any and every virtual service provider?  If you and the others
continue to remain silent on the obvious practical issue associated with
that, I won't take you seriously for another second. 

> Thus, there's no getting around the necessity for government 
> involvement at a material level.  The real issue is to what extent, if 
> any, government ought to abdicate or forego its traditional roles in 
> the context of the internet.

No, the real issue is that Internet _breaks_ the governments' traditional
roles in communication and information, and we need to figure out how we can
revise governmental functions to insert control where needed without killing
the freedom and openness that makes the internet valuable. And that was the
debate we were trying to have, until you detoured it into a general,
philosophical and mostly useless debate on government per se. 

____________________________________________________________
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