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

[Daniel Kalchev]

On 14.07.11 06:34, Paul Lehto wrote:
> Canada may do such a thing, but more likely will not. In contrast,
> CIRA arbitrations have already created, in reality, a private judicial
> arbitration system whereby (1)  anybody hauled into such an
> arbitration loses all of their procedural rights, foreign or domestic,
[...]

Paul,

Kerry has already provided good response, but I feel something was missing.

You claim to compare the 'old' system with a 'new' system and that the 
new system imposes private-owned enterprise rules.

What you compare in fact is the current system with the current system. 
Private arbitration courts have existed long before the Internet happened.

ccTLD registries are forced to create arbitration rules (and all the 
associated bureaucracy) not because they so desire, but because there is 
lack of adequate legislation created by the public authorities that can 
be used for domain name disputes. The existing judicial system sometimes 
comes to some rather funny or even absurd rulings. Each of the ccTLD 
registries operates for the benefit of their respective constituency and 
under their (local) governing law. If they misbehave, it is all too easy 
to be corrected -- there have been many, many lawsuits involving ccTLD 
registries -- but you will be surprised in how few cases the registries 
were found guilty. As years pass, local legislation improves with 
regards to domain name and Internet related issues and the 'private' 
policy applied by the ccTLD registries improves as well. There are 
already countries, where 'domain law' exists in one form or another and 
the ccTLD registry is happily relieved by the burden of running any 
arbitration.

In any case, both the (democratic) Government imposed old rules and the 
private-entity imposed old rules are inadequate. Private imposed rules 
have the benefit of being far more flexible and easier to fix. History 
of ccTLD registries development has already demonstrated this. Also, 
with primarily private rules, the Government imposed public rules apply 
anyway.

Unfortunately, I have no proposal how to fix the old system. But then, I 
am not politician either. :)

Daniel

PS: ICANN is an entirely different story, but we are already sort of 
off-topic...

PPS: By the way, law like that requiring ISPs to keep record of their 
customers Internet usage and provide access to that data to Government 
has passed already in Bulgaria. There was very strong public opposition 
and so far the implementation of this law is mainly used to track 
criminal activities. However, the law is in force and nothing prevents 
this or some next Government to actually enforce it.
____________________________________________________________
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