Text archives Help


Re: Re: [projectvrm] FYI: Internet governance


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Tom Crowl < >
  • To: Graham Reginald Hill < >
  • Cc: ProjectVRM list < >
  • Subject: Re: Re: [projectvrm] FYI: Internet governance
  • Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 18:49:27 -0700
Hi Graham... your points are well taken... My upvote is more about a growing recognition that ANY hegemony over broad areas of Internet activity (which can gets very specific in individual cases and individual applications)... is problematic... not that it should be handed over to Europe.

Of course... what does that leave? Either anarchy... or every nation (or governing body) able to affect Internet activity in one way or another in all or part of the net.... doing its own thing. And this is what is likely to happen... and is happening to the extent they can get away with it... regardless of the U.S's  or anybody else's assumed hegemony.

RE: "Oversight by the Commons" ... this too is a point well-taken.... since getting any large group to agree on anything is next to impossible.... especially when it gets to specific cases. BUT this needn't mean that NO aspect of the Internet may be suitable for some "hegemony".

Because we're already used to a sort of hegemony in certain areas.... and its such a thorough hegemony that we don't even notice it.

People with all kinds of radically different ideologies... people ready to kill one another... will still use the same currency... the same banking system... the same electrical grid... Hating each other all the way.

This is a hegemony. But it works because its very narrow in scope. (And a governing body can still turn off your electricity.. or confiscate your money)...

SO... that hegemony operates within heterogeneous systems of oversight and governance.*

*I'm a big fan of alternative and multiple currencies BUT a general use currency usable (or transmutable) across many sub-cultures will always be needed.

What I"m suggesting is to consider IF there may be some similar almost "invisible" hegemony that can be found for the Internet!

I'm suggesting a one-click payment system can offer that... though... at least for the foreseeable future... its likely different jurisdictions would limit its use in certain ways.

At least your thinking! I much prefer good critique to condescending indifference. And I'm sure my views remain imperfect. But there's a pony under this damn tree somewhere. And the smell is getting stronger.

Tom Crowl


On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 1:43 PM, Graham Reginald Hill < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
Hi Tom
 
We are used to schemes hastily cooked-up by various European governments in response to some perceived outrage or another. These schemes often emerge at the same time as governments are struggling against the tide of disaffected voters. The Socialist government in France is in exactly this position. The President's popularity is at an all time record low in public opinion polls and US hegemony in so many things is a long-standing bug bear for a country struggling with its historical declne as an influential country.
 
If France and Germany were to replace US hegemony over oversight over the internet with a European version, are we to believe that would be any better? Europe has the same underyling structural problems as the US, only multiplied 28 times over. It would be tantamount to jumping out of the regulatory frying pan straight into the fire. And oversight by the 'commons' is a laughably simplistic notion. The commons is anything but common. Instead, it is overseen by a self-selecting group with their own agendas and axes to grind, (like some of the people on the VRM Project Forum). These are the last people any thinking person would want overseeing the Internet. Or anything else important come to that.
 
We are in a classic Catch-22 situation; oversight over the Internet has recognised flaws in its current form, but any substantive change would introduce a whole new set of unintended flaws without necessarily fixing the original ones. Back to the drawing board.
 
Best regards from Cologne, Graham
 
 
 
+++ 10... this landscape must not be controlled by a few giant, trans-national corporations*... and while there well be many different governments and jurisdictions for the foreseeable future... and regulation and oversight is a needed element for any human endeavor (especially big ones).... but in some ways the net needs some insulation from all of them.
 
I suggest at least one critical, powerful element of the net be under commons-ownership (which I'll acknowledge has it own problems). Like some of the "roads"... like parts of the global transaction network.... especially those needing to operate across multiple platforms and systems. This can be done with a little foresight.
 
Of course we can leave it to the globalized banks.. they certainly know what they're doing. 
 
* this is not an anti-business view... but a recognition that any narrowly controlled landscape will lack the needed checks and balances to prevent abuse. I mean just in case any banks or Internet giants should ever misuse their positions... which as we all know could never happen.
   
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:45 AM, John Wunderlich < " target="_blank"> > wrote:
From a colleague on another list, but I thought might be of interest to VRM'ers, since it seems to me that the context in which VRM rolls out (or not) will depend to a certain degree on Internet governance.


http://www.euractiv.com/sections/innovation-enterprise/eu-internet-governance-franco-german-alliance-303421

A new report from the French Senate outlines a strategy for greater European internet governance spearheaded by the Franco-German alliance. Only then can the EU compete with US’s online hegemony. EurActiv France reports.

In a report published on 9 July, the French Senate proposed a new form of internet governance for Europe. The senators called on the EU to play a key role in ensuring that internet governance is independent and democratic.

According to Senator Gaëtan Gorce, head of the Senate’s mission, appropriately titled New role and new strategy for the European Union in the global governance of the internet, “the Snowden affair came as a blessing”, because it exposed the companies which store huge amounts of personal data. The revelations shook up public opinion, and people realised the importance of healthy internet governance.

The US is the global leader of the digital sector: 36 of the 50 top digital media companies are American.

>> Read: EU challenges US hegemony in global internet governance

“Internet governance has become a geopolitical issue. It is a new global battleground,” said Senator Catherine Morin-Desailly.

Reforming internet governance

The report contains 62 proposals aimed at “establishing a national and European strategy to secure our place on the digital world stage,” said Morin-Desailly. The Senate wants to improve internet governance through “an international treaty open to all states and an online ratification process for internet users.” It also wants to transform the Internet Governance Forum into a World Internet Council, which would control the conformity of decisions regarding internet governance.

The report also proposes to restructure the ICANN, a non-profit organisation that coordinates the Internet's global domain name system. It would become the World ICANN (WICANN), conform to international law instead of Californian law, and be accountable to the World Internet Council. An independent and accessible appeal mechanism would be set up to allow revision of WICANN decisions.

>> Read: French concerns over geographical indications will hamper TTIP talks

On 26 June, the French Secretary of State for Digital Affairs, Axelle Lemaire, took an assertive stance against the ICANN. In a press release, she said that she did not see the ICANN as “a suitable body to discuss internet governance.”

Europe must make itself heard

The authors of the report claimed that Europe is not vocal enough in discussions about internet governance. It supports a previous report by Catherin Morin-Desailly, The European Union, digital colony? (December 2013). In it, Morin-Desailly stressed that Europe had fallen behind: “Europe’s position is shrinking. Two years ago 12 European companies featured in the world’s top-hundred largest high-tech companies, but now there are only eight.”

Morin-Desailly wants the EU to “take its digital destiny into its own hands and make it a top political priority”. She believes that the EU should “build a European industrial strategy to gain more control over our data and convey our values". It would be linked to digital diplomacy “with a clear doctrine and financial means” in order to promote European values online.

Franco-German partnership

There is a lack of political will. Paris could spearhead the action, but it needs allies. The senators believe that the France-German partnership could be the engine behind Europe’s ambitions of internet governance.

A Franco-German alliance based on data-security is possible because of Germany’s interest in the area. The report proposes two concrete industrial projects: a mobile operating system and a secure and open European Cloud.

Gaëtan Gorce said it is in the EU’s interests to “affirm its principles and not to be shy,” emphasising the need to “speak as one and be coherent".


 
 
John Wunderlich
Privacist @PrivacyCDN


Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.