[governance] Meanwhile back at the ranch - Was Big Porn v. Big Web Ruling Could Spell Trouble for ICANN / was Re: new gTLDs

[Daniel Kalchev]

On Sep 12, 2012, at 4:23 PM, riaz.tayob at gmail.com wrote:

> There are a number of issues with kalchevs position from my point of view.
> 
> 1. No global consensus is passed off as a pure case when as far as cir goes the is an imperfect case of de facto control.

There is no known case of global consensus, where *everyone* agrees. Not in human history.

> 2. Saying there is no global consensus possibility unfairness the reality of choice for us seeking change... And hides the fact that certain kinds of agreements are possible... Wipo treaties, upcoming top, nafta, etc... So while the opinion of anti-multilateralism (or even any form of cooperation) may be valid, the arguments used o support this are not...

All of these treaties are accepted by a limited number of parties. This, by definition makes them not "global consensus".

As I previously commented, "the law sides with the stronger parties". All of the examples you give, reflect that observation perfectly.


> 3. I wonder what you would have made of the techie single rooters arguments in this context historically...

Interesting question. When I am faced with choices like this, I make decisions based on my own values and (then current) views and needs. Nothing more, nothing less.

I have made some choices, that did result in certain aspects of today's Internet. Others made other choices, some of these choices in concert with mine, some the opposite direction. When the forces were opposite, the stronger party prevailed :) (sometimes by pure persuasion of the masses or even politics)

Another fact to consider is that most people dimply do not care. This is the primary reason, why "government" structures exist at all. If everyone cared, those structures could not form in the first place... Internet has this interesting property, that it makes it much easier for anyone to care... even if temporarily, even if for a bit.

On the single root issue, the cold reality is that the Internet has as many roots, as there are computers connected to Internet. Each of these computers _independently_ choses who the roots are. Thing is, common sense made so that most computers on the planet point to the same root. Almost (*)

I am not trying to coach anyone with these comments: just pointing to some fundamental facts that are often overlooked in these discussions.

Daniel

(*) There is an effort to keep the list of root servers constant over time. However, from time to time there are changes. There are many computers on Internet, that have out-of-sync root server information and therefore, strictly speaking are not using exactly the same root. Again, most people won't care, as long as it "somehow works".
-------------- 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