<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Dear Parminder,</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">
<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">My response is also inline :)</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:44 PM, parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<font face="Verdana">Dear Siva<br>
<br>
pl see inline....<br>
<br>
</font><div class="">
<div>On Friday 14 March 2014 06:00 PM,
sivasubramanian muthusamy wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Dear
Parminder,</span>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">1, It
is interesting to note that what you have observed "Things are
not going in the right directions with the evolution of the
Internet vis a vis canons of equity and social justice (for
instance, 10 top websites had respectively 25, 50 and 75
percent of the total page views in the US in 2000, 2005 and
2010, and things have gone considerably worse since)." Are
these websites or networks of websites? Even if this data
pertains to "networks of websites", it would be interesting,
please provide a list.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
I provide as the quote occurs in an IT for Change annual report
"John Bellamy Foster and Robert W. McChesney discuss this in their
commentary on 'The
Internet’s Unholy Marriage to Capitalism',
noting how “we are entering a world of digital feudalism, where a
handful of colossal corporate mega-giants rule private empires....
the top 10 Web sites accounted for 31 percent of US page views in
2001, 40 percent in 2006, and about 75 percent in 2010...” (Monthly
Review, March 2011)". Sorry my numbers were slightly off, and the
actual facts show an even worse deterioration between 2005 and 2010.
<br><div class="">
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">2. I
am also interested in learning from you if there are any
barriers for entry for anyone from India or Brazil to publish
and promote such a "website" and gain a traffic share. Please
point me to any licensing barriers or growth bottlenecks for
any one from the Global South to build such a network.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
Well, one can also say, please show me any licensing barrier or
growth bottleneck for poor people to become rich and developing
countries to become developed! </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Poor people are slow to become rich and the rich become richer. That much I agree. In the conventional business </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">eco-system, it has not been possible, until recently, for a business firm a developing economy to globally compete with Western mega corporations, at least in some sectors. There have been barriers, visible and invisible. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Internet is free of such barriers, at least on a visible level. There may be some intricate barriers, but at like how it has been before the Internet. Internet has brought about a transformation. The Hope for the rest of the world comes from the borderless, One Internet, which is free and open. It so happens that "<span style="background-color:rgb(239,241,241);color:rgb(68,68,68);font-family:'Trebuchet MS','Lucida Grande',Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:16px;line-height:22.399999618530273px">Firms such as Google, Amazon, Craigslist, and Facebook have become iconic" </span>to quote from your source. My point is that there isn't an evil design behind the success of these corporations, they merely made use of the opportunities Internet presented, and succeeded. What prevents any one or any business firm from any other country from starting a search engine, a book store or a social network? In Internet there are no start up barriers, so it is the eco-system of hope. The strength of the eco-system comes from being borderless and global, so any argument to create divisions, even for rhetoric reasons, would lead to policies that would result in balkanization of the Internet, which would negatively alter the Internet eco-system and cause to perpetuate the very imbalance between the rich and poor. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Hope for the "Global South" lies in preserving the Internet eco-system of permissionless-innovation, which as an eco-system barely 20 years old, happens to have caused a relatively minor imbalance of a few American (and other) Corporations making visibly significant business gains. I would have no complaints about their business gains, but if your concern lies beyond this, I would argue that eventually there will be a balance, and the hope for such a balance comes from the very eco-system about which you have complaints, for it allows anyone to create a search engine, perhaps better than what Google has created :)</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Dear Parminder, If you want to fight for the Global South, then fight to preserve the Internet eco-system. </div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)">Sivasubramanian M</div>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51)"></div>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">After all poor are poor because they
are lazy and ignorant, and developing countries are lagging because
a large majority of its people are lazy and ignorant... What has any
kind of global structural conditions to do with it, and thus where
is their any role for any kind of political approach to such issues.<br>
<br>
I had thought that Social Darwinism was rather disreputable a social
theory to be cited in global political discourse.<br>
<br>
regards<span class=""><font color="#888888"><br>
parminder <br></font></span><div><div class="h5">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px"><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Thank
you</div>
<div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
Sivasubramanian M</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:07 PM,
parminder <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">While we are on this subject,
it may be useful for the 1Net to recognise that many
actors do not think the ' ICANN/IANA issue' should be
the main concern of NetMundial.... Reading the minutes
of the recent High Level Committee meeting for
NetMundial, I see France say this clearly, and ICANN rep
agree to it. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Now, even if we are to take
that ICANN/IANA will only be half of the story at
NetMundial, should we do some discussion on the other
half as well? Beginning perhaps with recognizing what
this other half is. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">I take it to the broader
public policy issues related to the Internet which are
either inherently global, like general jurisdictional
disputes and global mass surveillance, or have very
significant global implications, for instance, net
neutrality and economic of personal data. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">What kind of global Internet
governance mechanisms are required to address these
pressing global issues?</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">I certainly take the need for
urgent addressing of these issues to be of much greater
important than the ICANN/IANA issue. Also, remember that
President Rousseff's UN Speech which precipitated matter
and set us on the road to Sao Paolo had nothing to do
with the ICANN/IANA issue and everything to do with
these other issues.</p>
<span><font color="#888888">
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Parminder </p>
</font></span>
<div>
<div>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm"><br>
</p>
<div>On Friday 14 March 2014 01:05 PM, parminder
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"> <br>
<div>On Tuesday 11 March 2014 05:33 PM, S Moonesamy
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">Hi Parminder, <br>
At 02:29 11-03-2014, <a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>
wrote: <br>
<blockquote type="cite">The preamble is the same,
however the operative part is different. It <br>
provided a roadmap for institutional reform in
global governance. The <br>
earlier document was about principles for
Internet governance. <br>
<br>
Happy to provide any further clarification. <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
If one of the aims of the proposal is to help
developing countries, could you please explain how
it would help such a country? <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Dear Moonesamy,<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">I am happy to
explain...</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">To understand how the <a href="http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/democratising-global-governance-of-the-internet/164%20" target="_blank">proposal</a> from Just Net
Coalition helps developing countries one needs to
first understand 'what and who' shapes the
evolution of the Internet today, as the Internet
itself shapes our larger social structures,
whereby the impact of this 'what and who' goes
rather far and deep...</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">To keep it brief, it is
my understanding that the following key political
and economic forces shape the Internet today, in
the decreasing order of impact;</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Extravagant profit
motives of a few global corporation, almost
all US based;</p>
</li>
<li>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">The laws and
policies of the US, which are enforced,
overtly and subtly, on these global
corporation; and,<br>
</p>
</li>
<li>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Policy framework of
some clubs of rich countries, like the OECD
and CoE (for instance, OCED's principles for
Internet policy making).</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">There is huge nexus
between 1 and 2, which together constitute the
most powerful, in fact, quite overwhelming, force
shaping the Internet today. Meanwhile, the US is
largely able to bull-dodge its way with regard to
3 above as well. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Apart from the above,
Internet technical standards and critical resource
management bodies, also have a strong impact.
These bodies have swung between doing extremely
good work to frequent capture by the above
corporate interests. In my view, their public
policy oversight while important is relatively the
lesser problem right now as compared to other
issues listed above. </p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Now, before we move
forward to frame a response to the basic question
you asked, 'how does the Just Net Coalition's
(JNC) <a href="http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/democratising-global-governance-of-the-internet/164%20" target="_blank">proposal</a> help developing
countries', we need to form some level of
agreement on two propositions.</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">The above is
largely the right picture of the forces that
are shaping the Internet today.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Things are not
going in the right directions with the
evolution of the Internet vis a vis canons of
equity and social justice (for instance, 10
top websites had respectively 25, 50 and 75
percent of the total page views in the US in
2000, 2005 and 2010, and things have gone
considerably worse since).</p>
</li>
</ol>
If you strongly disagree with either of the above
two propositions, JNC's proposal will make no sense
to you. But if you do agree, there is a lot of
ground for us to look at remedial political
solutions. And I am ready to take up such a
discussion, admitting that our proposed solution may
only be one among many possible, and even perhaps
not the best one. Our group, in its collective
wisdom, thought that what is needed in the current
context is an counter-magnetic field to the highly
dominant forces today, that would be created by
developing an anchor point inside the UN system
which begins to undertake normative discussions on
issues of Internet policies, and where needed comes
up with higher norms and principles (as OECD has
come up with), policy frameworks, and as and when
needed, binding conventions and treaties.As happens
with every sector in the UN, it will be much more
about developing higher norms and principles, much
fewer policy frameworks and rather infrequent
conventions or treaties.... <br>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Such a counter magnetic
field alone can even begin balancing the
lopsidedness of the current political and economic
model around the Internet, and it goes to reason
that such a balancing will serve the interests of
developing countries, in fact of all marginalized
groups everywhere in the world.I hope you agree. <br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Regards</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm">parminder</p>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"> <br>
Regards, <br>
S. Moonesamy <br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@1net.org" target="_blank">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Sivasubramanian Muthusamy<br>India +91 99524 03099<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:rgb(51,51,51);display:inline">
</div>
</div></div>