[governance] Conflicts in Internet Governance

[Roland Perry]

In message <1A69CA05-6519-4CCE-BD08-76C735A603C4 at acm.org>, at 00:39:31 
on Mon, 15 Apr 2013, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> writes

>Some of the things I think of as government enabled theft in the Internet:
>
>- trademark of common words, on the Internet or in general.

One of the fundamental principles of the Internet is the facilitation 
provided by uniqueness. Whether that's IP addresses, email addresses, or 
labels we attach to things. Trademarks (in the bricks and mortar world) 
are simply a way for someone to protect the uniqueness of their product 
names, which also helps avoid confusion in the minds of consumers.

If someone wishes to Trademark a common (or generic) word, it can be 
very difficult. But once a Trademark has been "won" it should apply to 
any situation where the assumption of uniqueness might cause confusion 
if not enforced.

In the bricks and mortar world, one way of determining whether confusion 
might arise is by also taking into account the type of business. 
Therefore a recording company and a PC manufacturer both called "Apple" 
only risk confusion arising if they drift into one another's line of 
work. Yesterday I bought some petrol (aka gas) for my car at a filling 
station branded "Apple" (a complete co-incidence, I've never shopped 
there before).

Who should be entitled to labels like "apple.music" and "apple.pc", well 
I hope good sense would prevail (and I exclude here any licencing 
agreements which might or might not be in force in this particular 
example).  apple.com? Well that's where policy making has to be involved 
(first come first served vs an auction being likely candidates).

Governments can be a stakeholder in such a debate, but also have a role 
to play confirming the registration of the original trademark.

>- exorbitant fees for wireless bandwidth/access charged in some regions, especially when protected by government sanction  mono/duopololy

Fees charged for bandwidth and access have two components, one is the 
cost of supply (which can vary enormously on the territory and the 
access method) and the other is the profit element. I completely agree 
that excessive profits should be curbed, but that usually requires 
government intervention, rather than a lack of government control.

Government imposed monopolies are often a bad idea, but that's not 
something which is unique to the Internet.
-- 
Roland Perry

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