[discuss] Continuation of problem no. 1 specification, and what could be next steps
sm+1net at elandsys.com
Mon Jan 27 07:53:01 UTC 2014
At 11:55 26-01-2014, Avri Doria wrote:
>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.
There is a government at the national level. There are existing
structures to tackle specific issues, e.g. competition, and regulate
the market. There are also existing structures to discuss about
trade treaties. Making some problems Internet governance issues does
not help to fix them. If I am not mistaken one of the points Brian
was trying to explain was: does the issue belong here?
More information about the discuss