[governance] reality check on economics

[michael gurstein]

BTW, I think that this discussion on "monopoly" while interesting and useful is based on a significant red herring plopped on the IGC cutting board by Milton.  

The original note and the subsequent discussion by Parminder and others around the ITfC declaration was not by my reading about "monopoly" in the narrow economic sense but rather around the uncontrolled and so far uncontrollable power (economic, political, technical, communicative, informational etc.) that monopolies or near monopolies in the Internet space are being entrusted with given the overall significance, value and power that the Internet has acquired and is continuing to acquire in the daily lives of people, groups, communities, countries etc.etc. in every corner of the world.

I think that it is very difficult to dispute this ITfC (and other's) position and the need for some form of democratic, transparent and accountable  framework to ensure that this power is not used in an irresponsible, repressive, quixotic, destructive, completely self-interested way either by corporations or by governments or by rogue elements of civil society for that matter.

If for no other reason than that the Internet is so significant and its continued effective functioning is becoming so central as an electronic infrastructure for the well-being and future of mankind some globally legitimate means needs to be found to "govern" it in the interests of all. Whether that is through a mechanism such as CIRP (which I don't personally see as being feasible) or some other yet to be determined vehicle (as I've mentioned before I'm increasingly attracted to the norm based OGP framework) is a matter of negotiation and evolution.  That such a mechanism is absolutely and unarguably necessary and sooner rather later seems to me to be self-evident except to those whose ideological, self-interested or commercial blinkers are so strong as to make them blind to reality.

And moreover I would have thought that those who have a genuine rather than just a rhetorical interest in managing the egregious behaviour of Internet rogue states would be the most interested in a framework of norms and their operationalization as a way of putting globally actionable boundaries around those outcomes.

M
 
-----Original Message-----
From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2012 7:52 AM
To: IGC
Subject: Re: [governance] reality check on economics

On 20 May 2012, at 10:11, Guru गुरु wrote:

> On 20/05/12 18:54, Avri Doria wrote:
>> On 19 May 2012, at 23:39, Guru गुरु wrote:
>> 
>>> I think you have begun a useful thread of thought - the need for
>>> global regulation of business.
>> I did not go that far.
>> 
>> I was looking for what could be done at a global level to help avoid
>> local monopolies in information services.
> 
> What is the difference between "what could be done at a global level
> to help avoid local monopolies in information services" and "global 
> regulation".
> 
>> I also spoke of global work to help produce local regulatory reform.
>> I do not not advocate global regulation of business.
> 


Good question.  I think this is where we need to be creative in figuring out how to do things.  E.g  a global regulatory function, e.g ICANN use of contracts, might be tried.  I don't think that is has worked as well as hoped*, but I think it is a thought in the right direction.  ICANN does not regulate, but oversees a regulatory function that sometimes sort of works.  

In thinking about a regulatory function that is assisted but not overseen by global multistakeholder work, I think of a situation where the stakeholders can come to rough consensus on guidelines for local, for some definition of local, regulatory functions.  In turn, having come to these guidelines on a voluntary and multistakeholder basis, all parties pressure each other at the local level to live up to the rough consensus re-shared to the local context using their own methods: from governments making laws and regulations, to companies giving and withdrawing their investment, technologists shaping protocols to allow for the guidelines to be met (management frameworks etc) and civil society either supporting by buying or going to the streets with Occupy,  boycotts and other civil actions and sometimes even voting**.

avri


* Before you ask: 1) contracts seem to need to be rooted in national law, leaving us with the unfortunate situation of ICANN being anchored in a single country, 2) compliance enforcement is horrid (then again compliance enforcement is a problem in every regulatory system I have ever looked at) both of these could be fixed if ICANN had the will to do so.  

** When that mechanism works properly and isn't just another form of propaganda reaction.


-------------- 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