[governance] US House Bill to Affirm the Policy of the United States Regarding Internet Governance

[Roland Perry]

In message 
<CAOLD2+boLtP7KsvmiQoiAEsn_CxELVXN=f7uyVjK7FnQ6yXA9w at mail.gmail.com>, at 
14:33:31 on Mon, 15 Apr 2013, Andrea Glorioso <andrea at digitalpolicy.it> 
writes
>On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Roland Perry 
><roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:
> 
>And a tricky question from me: If people who uphold the law are 
>potentially not a legitimate stakeholder, what about the people who 
>break the law? [Who could be individuals, corporations and even 
>sometimes governments]
>
>Apologies but I'm not sure I understand the question: are you asking 
>whether people who break the law are legitimate stakeholders or not

Yes; one argument *for* is "full inclusion", one argument *against* is 
"but won't they try to adjust the law to their advantage during the 
negotiations".

Some might even say "if they break the law they have lost their right to 
be a stakeholder", others might argue it's helpful (and I apologise for 
an English language ideom) to employ "poachers turned gamekeepers" 
because they understand what the shortcomings in the proposals might be.
-- 
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