[governance] Is This An Issue for Internet Governance/Internet Human Rights?

[Paul Lehto]

On 7/22/11, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
>>OR, (2) the internet activity in question is beyond the legitimate power of
>>any actual or potential governance entity (whether public or
>>corporate),  including being beyond any claims for the *reasonable*
>>extension of some existing public or corporate power.
>
> A lot of things which are very important to Internet users are included
> within existing (or reasonable extension of) of e.g. telecoms, consumer
> protection, tax, copyright or privacy regulation; and would seem to be
> excluded as a result. Is that really what you intended?

If the issue is within a reasonable extension of a telecom, AND
(instead of the previous "or") it impacts the internet, then we'd have
to look for a constitutional or other bona fide limitation on power in
order to exclude the issue as an internet governance issue.  With this
caveat, my answer is yes.  But it's important to note that I'm
identifying the scope of jurisdiction or potential power, and not
saying in all or even most cases, necessarily, that it is best as a
policy matter to exercise that  power or to allow its exercise.

This last caveat above should avoid your worst fears or concerns about
overreaching power, presuming a majority of people are reasonable, or
as is more likely, can be persuaded to be reasonable with public
pressure.  I'm merely pointing to the broadest possible outline of
what is an "internet governance" issue, and noting that just because a
governmental power or corporate power might exist, does not mean at
all that it should or ought to be exercised....

The fact is, despite widely publicized disagreements elsewhere and on
this list over where exactly  the line should be drawn in terms of
limiting government power, virtually everybody agrees on some
important limitations or lines on government power.  The problem in
recognizing this reality occurs because the line or the limits for one
side of the debate aren't usually identified -- because the issues
don't play out in the vicinity of that line.

In addition to disagreement about where the line should be on what
government power is wise or prudent to exercise, there is also the
issue of applying (or not) substantial (and often analogous to
government restrictions) restrictions on private or corporate power as
well. Those private or corporate powers exist as "default" rules
whenever government doesn't act, or better yet, private or corporate
power acts in the vacuum created by any government inaction.  Of
course, corporations being purely creatures of self-interest, it is
hard indeed to get them to act in anything like the public interest
except by force (law), or by a happy coincidence between business
interests and the public interest.

Paul Lehto, J.D.
> --
> 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
>
>


-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
____________________________________________________________
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