[governance] Internet as a commons/ public good; was, Conflicts in Internet Governance

[Norbert Bollow]

McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:

> Again, what I object to most is that I think we are defining a thing
> by its epiphenomenal characteristics.

Suppose that a company X were to create a network of networks, possibly
TCP/IP based, but to some extent under the control of company X. For
example, the method by means of which company X retains control could
be that only networks operated by company X or its "certified partner
organizations" would be included in that network of networks.

The important difference to differentiate that kind of network from
what we call the Internet would be in the area of the epiphenomenal
characteristics, wouldn't it?

In any case, what word should be used to refer to the global ICP/IP
based network of networks which currently exists together with its
epiphenomena? Most people use the word "Internet". If that is one of
the valid meanings of the word "Internet", then it is IMO appropriate
to write a definition which explains that meaning.

An IGC statement containing that definition could contain a note that
the word "Internet" can also be used in a somewhat different sense
that refers to just the TCP/IP based network of networks in the
technical sense without including the whole epiphenomenon in what is
referred to.

Greetings,
Norbert

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