[governance] Ethiopia criminalises the use of VOIP

[Jean-Louis FULLSACK]

Are you just debarking from an exo-planet ?

 

Never heard of ITU as a multilateral UN agency, whose policy making/deciding members are its Member States ? (That means that its positions/actions may aim to the interest of its Member States, i.e.sovereign entities)

 

And probably never heard of policies which could aim to common, public interest ?

 

Or are these concepts out of age for you ?

 

Best

 

Jean-Louis Fullsack






> Message du 18/06/12 08:52
> De : "Daniel Kalchev" 
> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [governance] Ethiopia criminalises the use of VOIP
> 
>
> 
> On 17.06.12 04:40, Lee W McKnight wrote:

Now to our present concerns: ITU actions can indeed legitimate actions which I would argue are not in the interests of a nation's citizens, but may be in the interests of a state ministry of telecoms, and/or a national telecom provider. Which is reason enough to remain - observant - of what WCIT is up to, in all areas.
>


> Whose concerns are almost guaranteed to represent private commercial "get rich" interests.
> 
> History has it and I can certainly confirm observing it, that often the state owned telecom business is used to subsidize political parties, for such businesses often have extremely fuzzy accounting and very high margins -- and, for the most part steady cash flow guaranteed to last (with the help of ITU and various arrangements).
> 
> In most cases, you will hear the claim "we do this in the name of the people", which should be in fact translated as "look, we promised those people who put us in power, that they are going to get free ride. we do it, no matter what".
> 
> There are suggestions that the ITU is a "better" fit for the governance of Internet. Because, as they claim, the ITU has well-organized and disciplined resolution system. But, let me ask you: do you consider some well-organized army better suited to manage your country, by occupying it? (of course, this happens, all of the time, even today)
> 
> The concept, that ITU could bring the "sender pays" accounting mechanism to Internet is absurd. Yet more absurd is the concept that ITU could enforce bilateral interconnection arrangements for IP traffic. Remember, this is precisely what killed X.400 when it saw the (primitive at the time) competition by Internet-based e-mail (UUCP, SMTP, ...).
> Imagine, downloading huge file and having your provider pay you, because they sent your way more IP packets that you sent back? :)
> 
> Daniel
>


____________________________________________________________
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/20120618/b5a71dde/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