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

[S Moonesamy]

Hi Avri,
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?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy