[governance] FW: TP: city government exercising policy on Google Applications / consumer rights / Consumer Protection Act / trial period
parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Wed Jul 13 10:38:18 EDT 2011
On Wednesday 13 July 2011 07:50 PM, Dominique Lacroix wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I have been lurking this list for some monthes. Here is my first post.
> I'm a French Internet civil rights activist.
> Thank you very much for this very interesting discussion.
>
> Just a question, with a kind wink to Milton:
> don't you think that ICANN is working on trying to install itself as a
> sort of global government collecting taxes?
A very pertinent remark. And this should be read along with Paul Lehto's
excellent analysis of how (rather pernicious, and de facto monopolistic
and thus inescapable) commercial contracts are replacing public or
political governance on the Internet, which analysis is so good that I
cut-paste it at the end of this email. So public taxes on Internet based
services or applications are bad but taxes collected by private entities
in the name of service fees is fine. This is the new private governance
regime we are moving towards, and the dangers that it poses to our
social fabric, especially to democracy, should be evident. This
ideological divide between neoliberalism (that the propositions
advocating marketisation even of governance indicate) and democracy is
what is really behind the current discussion.
Parminder
Paul's analysis from his email earlier today
If one wants to see really intense and comprehensive regulation of
behavior, check out corporate franchising contracts, which insist on
control of every little facet of human business behavior. Government
by no means has a monopoly on intense regulation backed up by the
force of law. Corporations do intense regulation routinely, and call
it all good, and economically efficient and competitive, etc.,
in the
franchising context to give just one example.
Milton, I'd bet that the sum total of all pages of internet
regulation
via corporate contracts and terms of service exceeds the sum
total of
all pages of governmental internet regulation. Both are enforceable
in courts of law.
So what makes corporate regulation superior? It is more
voluminous and
detailed, and no user of the internet has any meaningful say or
right
to be heard in the creation of the corporate contract terms. How
many
contractual fine print consumer contract clauses have you reviewed
lately? They are as aggravating as the craziest and stupidest
government regulation, and people have essentially zero recourse
with
private corporations, which is worse than the attenuated kinds of
recourse we have in functioning democratic governments.
It's critical to keep in mind at all times, in my opinion, that
Corporate regulation and control of the internet is precisely
what we
get in every sphere in which the government (whether for good
reasons
or bad) exercises the "absence of control" Milton Mueller is arguing
for. This corporate regulation via detailed contractual fine
print is
progress? I think not.
(ends)
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Dominique Lacroix
> dl at panamo.eu
> Société européenne de l'Internet
> http://www.ies-france.eu/projet/
> 15, rue de l'Ancienne Comédie
> 75006 Paris
> +33 (0)6 63 24 39 14
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110713/379ef484/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list