[governance] ISOC/USG WCIT Post Mortem

[parminder]

On Thursday 27 December 2012 10:34 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> */Dr, Mueller here, to administer some ideological antidotes…/*
>
> */ <snip>/*
>

> */However, in one sense internet interconnection is and always has 
> been in the ITRs, and that is through Article 9 Special Arrangements, 
> which says they are deregulated and to be left to commercial 
> negotiations. /*
>

So, you do agree that Internet is already there in existing ITRs... That 
is an important point for the Internet exceptionalists - a major CS 
constituency in the ITU/ WCIT debate. (Does not matter whether it call 
for deregulation or regulation. We are speaking of jurisdictional 
competence here.)

> *//*
>
> */<snip>/*
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] Many people did openly call for ITU to die. See 
> Andrew McLaughlin’s comments at the NAF event, for one, which were 
> well-received. I have openly stated for months that the ITRs are not 
> needed /*
>

Do you think FCC is needed, and if so, for what..
>
> *//*
>
> *//*
>
> */Anyway, once again one has to be aware of the rhetorical ploy here. 
> To want the ITU to die does not necessarily mean one wants all 
> regulatory regimes around the internet to die, nor does it mean that 
> one wants all national regulatory regimes to die with it.
> /*
>

I think there is an important ideological as well as practical 
connection between the two..

parminder

> *//*
>
> *//*
>
> <snip>
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] Are you seriously suggesting that ITU could 
> become a force for global net neutrality?/*
>



> */Well, at least you are being consistent. As a pro-regulatory guy, a 
> person who seems to have never met an economic regulation he didn’t 
> like, you should indeed view the ITU as something not to be thrown 
> away casually. If only you and your friends could get ahold of it, 
> surely it could become a progressive force, right? <gales of laughter>/*
>
> *//*
>
> */Anyway, tell me again why we should care about whether the ITU 
> survives? That would be an interesting conversation for “we CS people” 
> to have. /*
>
> Why did we allow ourselves to so blatantly take sides in the intense 
> ideological struggle taking place around the remit and powers of the 
> FCC in the US, where the struggle for net neutrality is now all but 
> lost. A game which is going to soon visit our own national regulatory 
> systems very soon. Just watch out!
>
> */[Milton L Mueller] Here I have no idea what you are talking about – 
> when did “we” (a term that generally excludes me in your lexicon but 
> nevertheless strives to embrace the entire IGC) take sides on the FCC? 
> And how was this struggle lost? The FCC passed its Open Internet rules 
> and has actually applied them in a couple of cases. /*
>
>
>
>
>   
>   
>   
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130119/1751ff71/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