[governance] need for regulation ....

Mon Mar 10 14:19:45 EDT 2014

Grande CA,

With due respect, the argument that 'you need not use Google search' is 
quite impractical/rhetorical. Search is essential to meaning making and 
in today's digital society, let us not delude ourselves that we can do 
without Google search. Google search is a monopoly  (conventional 
meaning - dominant market share) for very good reasons, of which its 
algorithms perceived superiority is an important one, but also its HUGE 
economic power invested in numerous data centres that help crawl/store 
and crunch the indexed information fast enough to make the engine 
formidable.

You find my argument difficult to accept,  because you have perhaps 
already imagined that the only way search can work is in its current 
form -where it is offered in a secretive manner by a for profit entity 
-  where you_can_not_be_sure that the commercial interests of the search 
engine would affect your actual agency in searching. Sorry, did I said 
you cannot be sure,   I should have said - YOU_CAN_BE_SURE that google's 
commercial interests would make it fiddle with the search algorithms in 
ways that would maximise its profit (Read Eli Pariser on how Google 
search engine is manipulating search for maximising its profits ...and 
in this process could be giving the world a global lobotomy, article 
attached! So whose to care? so long as we all click on the EULAs, all is 
well?)

Whether these manipulations by Google, would be within current legal 
limits or could cross these limits is what for instance Indian CCI is 
investigating. We have NO_IDEA.

_Another world is possible_
We could imagine search otherwise as well ... as a huge public digital 
library, where neither information nor its search need to be 
proprietary. In my view, I CANNOT see any other way to prevent 
manipulation of algorithms by the vendor for maximising their 
profits.Whether this manipulation is legal or not can only be detected 
by knowing the algorithm :-) ,

The  "JustNetCoalition's" principles and roadmap can be something we can 
take forward for building a just and equitable net. See principle 8 of 
the JNC principles on this issue (also attached) and share your thoughts...

warm regards,
Guru

On 03/10/2014 08:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> I think there is a basic misunderstanding related to the role of
> private, free, non-mandatory services versus, for example, the required,
> paid for, connectivity services we need to be on the Internet.
>
> Services such as Google, Facebook, Twitter etc, are opt-in, not required
> for the user to be on the Internet. And they are free to use, regardless
> of what they do or don't with your visit to them. You visit at your own
> risk and will.
>
> Our broadband or mobile connection is paid, required if we wish to be on
> the Internet, and subject to a provider-user contract regarding which we
> can demand consumer and other rights.
>
> I do not see how we can just tell Google to do what Guru requests. One
> can just *not* use Google and still be on the Internet. Or can use just
> a few components with due care regarding personal privacy configurations
> if one wishes. Same with any other non-mandatory, free, opt-in service.
>
> IMHO
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 03/10/2014 07:26 AM, Guru गुरु wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Not clear, how in Multistakeholderism, where the private sector has an
>> equal footing in public policy making, we will get Google to agree that
>> its search algorithm, as the key factor organising the worlds
>> information/knowledge for all of us, needs to be public knowledge, not a
>> commercial secret. The need for it to be public knowledge stems from
>> privacy/surveillance concerns, because such fundamental knowledge ought
>> to be available as 'cultural commons' that others can
>> take/re-use/revise, fostering competition etc.
>>
>> regards,
>> Guru
>>
>> Google faces Rs 30,500-cr fine in India
>> New Delhi, PTI: March 9, 2014
>>
>>   Google can face a penalty of up to about $5 billion if it is found to
>> have violated competition norms of the country.  Google, which is facing
>> anti-trust investigation in India by fair trade watchdog Competition
>> Commission of India (CCI), can face a penalty of up to about $5 billion
>> (Rs 30,500 crore) if it is found to have violated competition norms of
>> the country.
>>
>> Google said it is “extending full cooperation” to the CCI in its
>> investigation. The conclusion of a two-year review by the US antitrust
>> watchdog has concluded that the company's services were good for
>> competition, it added. The case has been before the CCI for over two
>> years now, and it relates to allegations that Google is abusing its
>> dominant position. Under competition regulations, an entity found
>> violating the norms could be slapped with penalty of up to 10 per cent
>> of its three-year annual average turnover. In the case of Google, its
>> annual revenues in the last three years amounts to a staggering $49.3
>> billion (Rs 3.01 lakh crore), and the maximum penalty can be up to
>> nearly $5 billion.
>>
>> When asked about the ongoing probe and the potential penalty, a Google
>> spokesperson said: “We are extending full co-operation to the
>> Competition Commission of India in their investigation.”  The emailed
>> statement added: “We're pleased that the conclusion of the Federal Trade
>> Commission's two-year review was that Google's services are good for
>> users and good for competition.”
>>
>> A complaint filed with the CCI cannot be withdrawn. The complaint
>> against Google, also one of the world's most valued company, was first
>> filed by advocacy group CUTS International way back in late 2011. Later.
>> Matrimonial website matrimony.com Private Ltd also filed a complaint.
>> Last year, CCI chairman Ashok Chawla had said the complaint was that the
>> Google search engine favours platforms it wants to support.
>>
>> “That is, when you click on Google under a certain category, you will
>> get the platforms where there is a tendency to put them in a certain
>> order which may not be the fair and non-discriminatory. So, *what is the
>> software and what is the algorithmic search, (that is) what the
>> investigation team is looking at,” *Chawla had said.
>>
>> source -
>> http://www.deccanherald.com/content/390977/google-faces-rs-30500-cr.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140310/4dcb0396/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 4. The Filter Bubble by Eli Pariser.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 227104 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140310/4dcb0396/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Just_Net_Coalition_Principles_Brazil_sub.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 75403 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140310/4dcb0396/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- 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