[governance] Google's Fight the ITU/WCIT website

[Louis Pouzin (well)]

Hi all,

Google is now champion for arrogance and disinformation. They believe they
reached a State statute whereby they can dictate other States what they
have to do. Actually this not so different from the US gov attitude.

Google's dominance of the advertising market is in no way a guarantee of
quality and neutrality. They just leverage their dominance for promoting
their own business. And they conflate their particular interests with grand
ideologies as free information for all.

Let's assume that drugs are free for all. Then the web would be swamped
with ads for drugs, seminars praising benefits of using drugs, training
sessions for acquiring drug consumption art, testimonies from drug users
telling how it changed their life for the good, mass campaign vilifying
institutions or governments requesting drug control, and so on. Just
because the drug maffia has enough resources for controlling a free market.
And the saying is "the market is right".

As expected, the simple association of information and drug will
immediately raise fury. It's just taboo. Like associating Google interests
with freedom of information.

There was a time when the US gov would resist and break excessive and
abusive dominance in certain market segments, like oil, bank, telecom. Now
it's the opposite. Excessive market dominance is good for US world
dominance, as long as the dominant firms are based in the US. Then where
are check and balance mechanisms ?

Let's not be fooled by Google stylish propaganda. The real issues in WCIT
2012 have nothing to do with internet censorship, and Google knows it too
well. The issues are finding a more equitable balance between stakeholders
interests and profits.

Parminder's observations are entirely relevant. The most dangerous threats
to information freedom are US lead secretly negotiated treaties by
multi-national lobbies, SOPA, ACTA, etc. More are coming, still secret,
basically a rehash of those that failed, TPP, CleanIT, .. watch out.

Cheers, Louis
- - -


On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:24 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:

>
> On Wednesday 21 November 2012 01:19 PM, parminder wrote:
>
> snip
>
>
>  Dear Google; Yes, the world indeed needs an open Internet, for which
> reason it is rather awful to note that you, meaning, Google;
>
> 1) Sold the entire net neutrality campaign down the drain in the US, by
> first assuming its leadership and then entering into a self-serving
> agreement with Verizon, whereby the main means of accessing the Internet in
> the future - mobiles - are exempted from net neutrality provisions.
>
> 2) Have recently entered into exclusive arrangements with telecos to
> provide Gmail, Google + and Google Search for free in some developing
> countries (Philippines) , and as a special low cost package exclusively of
> a few Internet services (and not the full, public Internet) in others
> (India), which makes a mockery of an open and net neutral Internet.
>
>
> BTW, is it a mere coincidence these new mobile based non-net-neutral
> services seem to have something to do with the betraying compromise that
> Google made that is mentioned in point 1 above?
>
>
> 3) Tweak your search results, which is increasingly the main way of
> accessing locations on the Internet, in non-transparent ways, with
> increasing evidence that this is done in a manner that merely serves your
> own commercial interests and goes against consumer/ public interest, and
> for which reasons Google is currently subject to regulatory investigations
> in the US and EU.
>
> ( There are hundreds of other outrages, big and small, including the fact
> that today I suddenly  see my default browser getting set for "Chrome'
> when I prefer and have always used Mozilla Firefox and never asked for the change
> of default.)
>
> I cannot see anything other than effective regulation of the Internet to
> be able to check such excesses by Internet companies that are deeply
> compromising the openness of the Internet (sticking here to only to the
> subject of openness of the Internet, used in above appeal by Google).
>
> So, lets be honest, it is not about people versus ITU, not even, Google
> versus ITU, or even Google versus content regulation; it is Google versus
> any regulation of the Internet space so that Google, and similarly
> positioned dominant players, can have a free run over the economic, social
> and political resources of the world.
>
> It is very important to wage the needed struggles to keep Internet's
> content free from undue statist controls. But one needs to be careful about
> whom one chooses as partners, nay, leaders of the campaign. Remember, the
> lessons from the net neutrality campaign in the US which was sold cheap by
> those who assumed its leadership. Also, have no doubt whatsoever that ACTAs
> and PIPAs will come back in new forms, accommodating the interests of the
> big Internet companies that led the opposition in the first round. (Anyone
> wanting to take a bet on this! :) ) And. when the second round happens,
> since 'our leaders' would have crossed over, there wouldnt be much fight
> left to give.
>
> For sure, make opportunistic, tactical, alliances, but civil society needs
> to be careful not to abandon leadership of public interest causes to
> players who cannot but become turncoat and, well, betray, - sooner or later
> getting into bed with whoever is economically and politically powerful
> around to help their business prosper. Such is the structural logic of big
> business. Let them stick to what they do best - organise productive forces
> of the world. Leave public interest causes to public interest players -
> civil society and governments. However, if the sentiment is simply
> overflowing, maybe just donate some money to such causes, in an arms-
> lenght /hands-off approach vis a vis managing the precise activities
> involved. I simply dont fancy corporate-led 'public interest' campaigns.
>
> One was stuck by the number of Google organised panels at the Baku IGF,
> where they openly took part and gave their policy pitch. As a participant
> from Pakistan said at a workshop ' I find a Google representative at every
> panel that I am at'. Such brash presence at policy forums and taking strong
> policy positions by corporates is a relatively new game, and to my mind not
> a welcome thing for our democracies. I keep hoping that civil society would
> give this phenomenon a deeper thought and analysis, rather than just riding
> the bandwagon.
>
> parminder
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121121/a95c9c48/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