[governance] Internetistan, or the Bit Boat... a new approach to Internet governance!

Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
Wed Dec 12 23:37:57 EST 2012 

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 5:25 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:

>
> On Wednesday 12 December 2012 09:24 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>  If we continue with the example that Parminder raised in relation to
> addressing IPR violations where the "subject" in this case the "content" is
> in "transit"-  this is why countries around the world at least as far as
> IPRs have been pushing harmonisation of their laws.
>
>
> Sala,
> Harmonisation of laws on IPR, which serves powerful interests, but not on
> other areas - like tax accruals (see your own google tax evasion posting),
> global net neutrality, consumer protection vis a vis global digital
> companies and so on...
>

Hi Parminder - I am aware of the dynamics and was not disagreeing with the
points you raised. Even with IPRs, precedence has been set by countries who
are pushing an open and free internet to move towards "unspeakable :("
things like DNS filtering and digital rights management - the fear now is
that once you start - people keep pushing the boundaries, this is systemic
and human nature. This is why people fight for a free and open internet.

One of the challenges however is the polarisation between some commercially
driven segments and governments over the taxation issues but will not get
into that. To discuss harmonisation is not the solution in my view as my
assessment as there is no way that parties will come together too much is
at stake for them and it is in the billions of revenue and sadly for most
people this is what makes the world go round.

What we would be better off doing is a thorough assessment of all the
layers and pointing out the dangers that highlight regulatory trends
globally and also point out threats to openess and why it is in the world's
interests that we continue to have an open and free internet but at the
same time fulfil our core responsible citizens as good citizens or global
citizens or netizens but some would argue that this is utopia and a suburb
of Absurdistan.

Even beyond the WCIT, stakeholders need to reflect on the "bigger picture"
- meaning both civil society, private sector and the public sector -
multistakeholder has to transcend getting people of diverse compositions
into the same room but recognising and respecting the diverse roles that
each plays so that there is real harmonisation and not a legislated one.

>
> And this is what global Internet related public policy making is all
> about, from which so many of us rebound instinctively ...
>
> India's CIRP proposal described its intent as follows
>
> The intent behind proposing a multilateral and multi­stakeholder
> mechanism is not to "control the Internet" or allow Governments to have the
> last word in regulating the Internet,  but to make sure that the Internet
> is governed not unilaterally, but in an open, democratic, inclusive and
> participatory manner, with the participation of all stakeholders, so as to
> evolve *universally acceptable, and  globally harmonized policies in
> important areas *and pave the way for a credible, constantly evolving,
> stable and  well­functioning Internet that plays its due role in improving
> the quality of peoples' lives everywhere. (emphasis added)
>
>
> The other way of global harmonisation, as US and OECD wants, is for these
> powerful countries to make policies and then arm twist others to join
> in....
>
> Civil society will need to take a view on what kind of 'global
> harmonisation' do they want. What is your view?
>
> Unfortunately, till now most of the global civil society have generally
> sided with the powerful in the above regard.
>
>
> parminder
>
>   There are massive implications on openness etc.
>
> Sala
>
>>
>>
>> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:
>> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *parminder
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 12, 2012 4:08 PM
>> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>
>> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Internetistan, or the Bit Boat... a new
>> approach to Internet governance!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday 12 December 2012 07:24 PM, Michael Kende wrote:
>>
>> Hello Bertrand and Nick,
>>
>>  <snip_
>>
>> The question then is whether this principle of non-tampering with transit
>> traffic holds for traffic that may be stored in the country, even if it was
>> filtered along with other international content before being viewed by
>> citizens of the country where it was hosted.
>>
>>
>> Michael
>>
>> You may know that third party cargo in transit is being impounded in OECD
>> countries for IP violation when the stuff is made on one country and headed
>> for another, and has nothing to do with the impounding jurisdiction. see
>> for instance,
>> http://keionline.org/blogs/2009/02/03/intervention-by-brazil-at-wto-general-council-on-seizure-of-500-kilos-of-generic-medicines-by-dutch-customs-aut
>>
>> There have been other cases as well. I understand 'border measures'
>> envisaged under ACTA also enables such in transit seizures of third party
>> goods.
>>
>> parminder
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [
>> mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org<governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>]
>> *On Behalf Of *Bertrand de La Chapelle
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 11, 2012 6:11 PM
>> *To:* Nick Ashton-Hart
>> *Cc:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; Jovan
>> Kurbalija; McTim
>> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Internetistan, or the Bit Boat... a new
>> approach to Internet governance!
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear Nick,
>>
>>
>>
>> Just a brief comment on the issue of "transit traffic". This is an
>> interesting component to explore. As I have often said, I believe that
>> Egypt acted in reference to an implicit emerging international principle of
>> "*non-tampering with transit traffic*" when it blocked access to the
>> Internet during the Arab Spring but did not impact the transit traffic
>> serving the easter coast of Africa.
>>
>>
>>
>> Discussing this in more detail would indeed be useful and could probably
>> be part of an international/global regime.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>>
>>
>> Bertrand
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton at ccianet.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Funny, I have been thinking of the Law of the Sea for a few weeks as an
>> interesting construct for the legal protection of the open flow of data.
>>
>>
>>
>> It is true that there's a built environment to the Internet - but in
>> maritime law ships are also physical and registered with a state. However,
>> the space they travel through, beyond the territorial waters limit, is open
>> sea and by definition not owned by anyone.
>>
>>
>>
>> If we used this construct to protect the flow of international data, that
>> might be a workable metaphor. The Law of the Sea embodied in UNCLOS is,
>> after all, largely simply a distillation of internationally-understood
>> principles about maritime law that go back to the Roman period.
>>
>>
>>
>> We could do much worse than an international understanding that data,
>> when transiting any country between a source and destination in third
>> countries, was legally not actually 'in' the territory or subject to the
>> laws of the state it was transiting, but subject only to an international
>> regime.
>>
>> (Bertrand: these ideas are what I was speaking of when I told you at Baku
>> I had an idea for your jurisdiction project that might have potential).
>>
>>
>>
>> FWIW: For those who are about to remind me, I am aware that the USG has
>> yet to ratify UNCLOS. It is clear that the current Administration is very
>> much in favour of doing so, however, as are many members of the legislative
>> branch).
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Nick Ashton-Hart
>>
>> Geneva Representative
>>
>> Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA)
>>
>> Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45
>>
>> Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44
>>
>> Mobile: +41 79 595 5468
>>
>> USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430
>>
>>
>>
>> *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here:
>> http://meetme.so/nashton*
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic
>> mangling.
>>
>>
>> On 7 Dec 2012, at 16:23, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" <apisan at unam.mx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>  Jovan,
>>
>>
>>
>> thanks for doing a pretty innovative thing here: discussing ideas.
>> Further, bringing a fresh approach and actual expertise.
>>
>>
>>
>> My long-standing concern for analogies between Internet governance and
>> the laws of the sea is that the Internet is much more a built environment
>> than the sea (not that the sea is all natural and in fixed form forever,
>> immune to our contamination and our imagintion.)
>>
>>
>>
>> So Internet governance refers not only to rules etc. to live on the
>> existing Internet, but also has to be useful as guidance in its expansion
>> and development. To abuse your analogy, it's not only about shipping,
>> fishing, and mining, but also about how to actually make the oceans of
>> tomorrow.
>>
>>
>>
>> That brings you to points like: you can use Ostromian theory to
>> understand the tragedy of the commons in fisheries; but can you extend it
>> to Internet governance? What are the limitations? Can you address concerns
>> from liberals to socialists in a new framework without actually changing
>> the salinity or wanting to reverse the flow of the Humboldt current?
>>
>>
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> Yours,
>>
>>
>>
>> Alejandro Pisanty
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ! !! !!! !!!!
>>
>> NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO
>>
>>
>>
>> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD
>>
>> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO
>>
>> SMS +525541444475
>>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
>> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
>>
>> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
>> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn,
>> http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614
>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
>> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
>> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
>>   ------------------------------
>>
>> *Desde:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [
>> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Jovan Kurbalija [
>> jovank at diplomacy.edu]
>> *Enviado el:* viernes, 07 de diciembre de 2012 08:37
>> *Hasta:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; McTim
>> *Asunto:* Re: [governance] Internetistan, or the Bit Boat... a new
>> approach to Internet governance!
>>
>> Well, we have innovation!  With the IGF in Bali, and ICANN on a cruise
>> ship, we may have 'beach or floating governance'. Internet governance could
>> be fun!
>>
>>
>> I like the metaphor of the ship since it implies our common destiny. We
>> are all passengers of ICANNia or ITUnia or...*?*       Metaphors are
>> also useful to remove our tunnel vision and make us think more creatively.
>> In another metaphor, I hope that Internetistan will resist Absurdistan (here
>> is the map of this fast-growing country<http://diplo.smugmug.com/ILLUSTRATIONS/Posters-1/4464706_T4FW6r#%21i=1104113260&k=2GsD8hV&lb=1&s=A>).
>>
>>
>> But back to the current reality. Unfortunately, the ICANN cruise ship
>> won't solve the problem of internationalisation. 'Open sea' refers only to
>> freedom of navigation. It does not deal with the status of the ship. All
>> relations on the ship are regulated by the national law of the ship's flag.
>> ICANNia has to be registered somewhere. One solution could be a flag of
>> convenience such as Liberia or Panama.  What happens on the ICANNia is
>> regulated by national law, with no major differences from any other
>> land-based entity (company, organisation). Yes, ICANNia can sail in
>> whatever direction it wants to sail, but the decision must be made by the
>> captain according to the rules of the flag's state. Extrapolating from the
>> role of the captain on the ship, the ICANNia would look like military unit.
>> The cruise ship metaphor gets even more interesting  when we consider
>> different classes of cabins, rescue operations, etc.
>>
>> These thoughts have taken me back to Hugo Grotius's book *Mare Liberum*that established the "open sea" concept four centuries ago as opposed to
>> the idea of a *Mare Nostrum*. * *His relevance for our time is sobering.
>> If we replace 'sea' with 'Internet' we could have the next book on the
>> Internet. Grotius was a very interesting personality.* * Besides being
>> one of the first international lawyers, he was one of the founders of the
>> 'natural law' school of thought.  In addition, he wrote a lot about social
>> contract (before Rousseau, Locke, and others). As a matter of fact, his
>> social contract theory could be applicable to the Internet.
>>
>>
>>
>> When it comes to the concept of open sea, Grotius had an interesting
>> interplay with the political masters of his era.  He believed in open sea,
>> but Dutch and British authorities quickly realised the usefulness of his
>> doctrine. They had the biggest fleets and had ambitions to develop trade
>> and colonial empires. Grotius provided them with the necessary doctrine or
>> 'political software'.  However, Grotius always argued that 'open sea' needs
>> rules and principles in order to be 'open'. Although it was
>> counter-intuitive to the leaders of two growing maritime powers, he managed
>> to convince them that it was in their best interest to 'tame' their
>> comparative powers and ensure the sustainability of their empires beyond
>> the 17th century. Everything else has written the history, which proved
>> Grotius right. We can draw many parallels, with the necessary caution that
>> historical analogies should be handled with care.
>>
>> While we are waiting for a new Grotius (or Godot), we should review how
>> we debate Internet governance issues. Grotius was a great scholar who
>> mastered the existing rules before he started changing them. We, on the
>> other hand, use well-defined and developed concepts in a relaxed way. A few
>> examples...
>>
>> As we saw, the frequently used metaphor of the open sea does not
>> translate to an open Internet. In many respects, it can lead in the
>> opposite direction (Internet Nostrum).
>>
>> Another example is the role of states' responsibility in the Internet
>> era. This is a well-defined concept in international law. If we want states
>> to be responsible for whatever is originating in their territories  (e.g.
>> cyber-attacks, botnets),  we have to give them the tools to ensure their
>> responsibility (mainly state control, regulation, and surveillance). Most
>> writings on state responsibility start from the opposite assumption, i.e.
>> the limited role of the state. With all the creativity and imagination in
>> the world, we still cannot have it both ways.
>>
>> The most topical example of the need for evidence-based policy is the
>> case of the Red Cross name/emblem at ICANN. There are very clear rules for
>> the protection of the Red Cross name/emblem that were adopted some 100
>> years ago and have been followed, without  reservation, on national and
>> international levels.  ICANN was right in protecting the Red Cross name but
>> made the mistake of putting it together with organisations that do not
>> enjoy the same status (the International Olympic Committee).
>>
>> Even if we want to change the rules in order to adjust to
>> the specificities of the Internet era (if any), we have first to master
>> them. I see here an important role for academic and civil society
>> communities. If we had advised ICANN to evaluate the Red Cross and IOC
>> submissions separately, we could have avoided a lot of policy confusion and
>> wasted time.
>>
>> The GIGANET might consider the evidence-based policy research as the key
>> theme for the next meeting?
>>
>> Regards, Jovan
>>
>>
>>  On 12/6/12 3:31 PM, McTim wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>
>>
>>
>> If domiciling ICANN in a nation state is problematic, perhaps ICANN could
>> buy this cruise ship as a HQ:
>>
>>
>>
>> http://cruiseship.homestead.com/Cruise-Ship.html
>>
>>
>>
>> It would help solve the problem of internationalisation, be a permanent
>> host for ICANN meetings (2450 berths....saving hotel costs for all) and
>> generate revenue intersessionally.  It's a 3-fer, plus it's a snip @~ 300
>> million USD!!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
>> indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> *Jovan Kurbalija, PhD*
>>
>> Director, DiploFoundation
>>
>> Rue de Lausanne 56 *| *1202 Geneva *| *Switzerland
>>
>> *Tel.* +41 (0) 22 7410435 <%2B41%20%280%29%2022%207410435> *| Mobile.* +41
>> (0) 797884226
>>
>> *Email: *jovank at diplomacy.edu  *| Twitter:* @jovankurbalija
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *The latest from Diplo:* today – this week – this month<http://www.diplomacy.edu/currently>
>> *l* Conference on Innovation in Diplomacy (Malta, 19-20 November 2012)<http://www.diplomacy.edu/conferences/innovation>
>> *l** *new online courses <http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses>
>>
>>   ____________________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ____________________
>> Bertrand de La Chapelle
>>
>> Internet & Jurisdiction Project Director, International Diplomatic
>> Academy (www.internetjurisdiction.net)
>>
>> Member, ICANN Board of Directors
>> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32 <%2B33%20%280%296%2011%2088%2033%2032>
>>
>> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de
>> Saint Exupéry
>> ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans")
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed
>> to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business.
>>
>> Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered
>> office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number
>> 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244 <%2B44%20845%20600%205244>. Email
>> enquiries at analysysmason.com or visit www.analysysmason.com
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>> This email is confidential and is protected by copyright. When addressed
>> to our clients it is subject to our terms and conditions of business.
>>
>> Analysys Mason Limited is registered in England and Wales. Registered
>> office: Bush House, North West Wing, London WC2B 4PJ, UK. Registered number
>> 05177472. Tel +44 845 600 5244 <%2B44%20845%20600%205244>. Email
>> enquiries at analysysmason.com or visit www.analysysmason.com
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
> Tel: +679 3544828
> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
P.O. Box 17862
Suva
Fiji

Twitter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Tel: +679 3544828
Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121213/9563099f/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

More information about the Governance mailing list