[governance] Should Internet based two-sided markers be regulated by countries or govts

Sun Aug 19 04:44:36 EDT 2012

Hi Parminder,

I don't remember taking a position in favor of or against a UN CIRP and my
neutrality on the control or regulation issue remains because my country
appears to remain outside the IGF, takes OIC positions in the HRC and is
highly pro-surveillance, pro-content filtering, pro-blocking and our
internet rights groups are either Internet Giants funded or live off donor
agendas that fund only false war torn and gender abuse and separatist peace
security propaganda.

It is a false accusation that Pakistan has its own say in such matters as
its part of a larger bloc called the OIC, see what OIC is saying in the
context of the Syrian crisis.

I try to balance things in view of facts, figures and context but it is an
irony that in the US, people want an open and network neutral Internet but
their companies seem to be playing around anything but that and their
citizens are harassed and jailed in the name of Copyrights and IP and their
companies are seemingly living off technologies patent wars with sometimes
stuff they didn't even create but own patents to!

The kind of people that i can foresee will end up discussing Internet
policy in such a proposed UNCIRP setting is very dangerous with the usual
topi-drama by private sector led business and information cartels, civil
society funded by Internet Giants and dominant governments stepping on
developing countries will be the norm.

Attempting to create a new IGF with more concrete UN or multilateral
funding isn't going to take the Internet anywhere, make what you have
effective and prove that it will work!

The world tends to remain ignorant on internet public policy issues trying
to pump life into the IGF as well as other policy settings displaying the
dilemma you shared and many opportunistic people that know anything about
it are busy milking cows. Where's the love my friend!

Fouad Bajwa
On Aug 19, 2012 11:33 AM, "parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

>  Sala (and Fouad)
>
> I am a bit surprised at your emails discussing in such a positive manner
> the need for developing countries to assert themselves in global regulation
> of the Internet, which regulation we all know does in any case happen by
> default by powerful countries. For if indeed this is your political
> position or even inclination, why, when a UN CIRP kind of proposal is
> brought up even just as a dialogue opener, does everyone join the bandwagon
> of a shrill 'down, down' , even without giving it an opportunity of a
> reasoned discussion.
>
> To discuss just one global Internet policy related issue that you have
> touched upon, fair distribution of taxes accruing, or that should accrue,
> from commercial transactions on the Internet, europe has an inter-country
> agreement on it.... Why shouldnt developing country also be party to such
> agreements, so that they dont lose revenue. However, when any real
> institutional proposal to move in such directions comes up, as CIRP is, how
> easily we all - and I address this specially to civil society from
> developing countries -  merrily follow the pied pipper's tune of 'threat to
> the Internet', 'theat to FoE' and the such, towards our continued
> collective bondage and domination by the North ....
>
> Any political position, I would say. is only as good as the willingness to
> work on the corresponding real political possibilities. If you dont like a
> CIRP like possibility, sure, do suggest others. But what is the point in
> vain musings, without putting your political currency where your mouth is.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
>
>  On Saturday 18 August 2012 11:19 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
> I don't see why they could be exempt from taxes and why they should not be
> regulated. Ordinarily just as any person travelling to another country is
> subject to the laws of that country and this is true from the moment you
> step into their airspace or water or cyber space. What made the US take
> down Rojadirecta? See: http://www.rojadirecta.com/  where you will see
> evidence of a domain name take down by ICE Homeland Security
> Investigations?
>
>  The only material difference really is that developing countries have
> been dormant and sleeping. If you look at the regulatory trends around the
> world, the developed world has been efficiently keeping companies hosting
> content on the Internet in check and making sure they act responsibly. All
> of a sudden when the "sleeping giant" awakens, ie. the developing world
> wanting to do the same thing there are all kinds of marketing strategies
> designed to take the focus away from the core issues. The reality is that
> this is a new day, markets are being levelled, knowledge is free and the
> developing world has been empowered.  [*Slight bunny trail: If you think
> about how some of these countries were formerly under the dominion of
> others, where much of their wealth and natural resources were sized to
> build empires whilst their own countries lie in ruins. Countries are now
> awakening to build their nations, their infrastructures, their economies etc
> *]
>
> Why should'nt the developing world regulate two-sided market economies? At
> the end of the day, the objections to "Taxation" are about the "bottom
> line" and if that is countries' only mechanism available for making these
> corporates act responsibly.
>
>  In my view the crux of the complex debates revolving around Regulations
> stems from the notion of "borders". Countries have the responsibility of
> looking out for their respective interests.
>
> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 1:45 AM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I was asked an interesting question today by a colleague on the
>> discussion about Google's interference in national electronic
>> commerce/e-payment, privacy and ITU-ITRs positions in developing countries
>> in Asia.
>>
>> She asked whether developing countries should regulate two-sided market
>> economies where the platforms were US based content and services providers
>> and tax them and design laws to prevent their interference within a
>> sovereign country's policies?
>>
>> Fouad Bajwa
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> P.O. Box 17862
> Suva
> Fiji
>
>  Twitter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120819/8dfba33b/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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