[discuss] Commercial sponsorship of meetings conflict w/Internet stewardship? (was: Re: Comcast undertakes 9 year IETF cosponsorship!?)

Sun Mar 23 08:20:52 UTC 2014

Hi Mike,
At 17:39 22-03-2014, michael gurstein wrote:
>[MG>] I would need to have much more direct familiarity with the 
>various institutions to give a useful answer to this question but in 
>the first instance it would be good if the various institutions were 
>to recognize the potential of such a problem and indicate what 
>measures they would put in place to mitigate. I note Stephen 
>(Farrell's) comments re: the specifics of the IETF processes but 
>would suggest that the problem if it occurs is as likely to be in 
>the form of implicit processes of influencing as in overt/explicit 
>interventions by which I mean influencing what matters are seen as 
>being acceptable to be included or not included on agendas, 
>influencing the kind of persons who are  nominated for various 
>positions (and not nominated), and overall helping to shape and 
>influence the "climate" of the discussion in certain 
>"self-interested" ways e.g. what are the boundaries of acceptable 
>discourse; who or what positions are identified as being outside of 
>what is acceptable; determining what are the implicit norms, values 
>frameworks for problem definition/resolution and so on.

Lobbying is the practice of individuals and organisations trying to 
influence the opinions of a public office holder.  Organisations, 
usually businesses, will try to intervene if a decision is for or 
against their interests.  The interventions could be direct or 
indirect.  A business could, for example, enlist a civil society 
organisation to intervene on their behalf.

People sometimes participate in discussions to influence the 
outcome.  There can be other reasons.  I'll leave it to other persons 
to comment about them.  Would it be possible not to allow 
participation from people working for a business?  Yes.  The business 
will then enlist some civil society organisations to participate on 
their behalf.  You basically solved the problem (of direct influence) 
while creating another problem.

By the way, I did not receive any reply to my previous message.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy 