[discuss] Continuation of problem no. 1 specification, and what could be next steps

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Mon Jan 27 04:54:19 UTC 2014


Because it doesn't only affect the Internet.


On 27/01/2014 08:55, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
> While it may not be an issue at the International level of Internet
> governance, something I still don't fully accept, it may relevant at the
> regional or national levels of Ig.  In so far as there are specific
> issues with regards to the Internet  and how it, within the marketplace,
> is regulated in a country, why isn't it a national Ig issue.
> I don't see why correcting the "domestic market (mis)regulation"  for
> some defintion of mis [free market excess, central state control,
> negligence, ...] isn't the epitome of a Internet governance issue at the
> national and perhaps trade treaty level.
> avri
> On 26-Jan-14 14:18, S Moonesamy wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>> At 09:14 26-01-2014, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>>> That paper is interesting, but both it and your own argument lead me
>>> towards the view that this is not a matter of Internet governance at
>>> all, but an issue of domestic market (mis)regulation.  I don't see how
>>> we can fix that and I'm also not sure it would be correct for us to try.
>> Agreed.
>> I don't see how domestic market (mis)regulation can be a matter of
>> Internet governance as:
>>    (i)  It is a matter for the relevant country to decide.
>>    (ii) The issue also covers non-Internet areas.
>> It would be problematic to try and fix such problems through Internet
>> governance (see Brian's comment about national economic policies).
>> Regards,
>> S. Moonesamy
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at 1net.org
>> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at 1net.org
> http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

More information about the discuss mailing list