<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <font face="Verdana">Dear Siva<br>
      <br>
      pl see inline....<br>
      <br>
    </font>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Friday 14 March 2014 06:00 PM,
      sivasubramanian muthusamy wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAKsgsGxoLgCNbEYqp-kHSZ_sDpsac=2DZnC1FHe2QidGzz-=oQ@mail.gmail.com"
      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, &nbsp;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)." &nbsp;Are
          these websites or networks of websites? &nbsp;Even if this data
          pertains to "networks of websites", it would be interesting,
          please provide a list.</div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    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&nbsp;
Internet&#8217;s Unholy Marriage to Capitalism',
    noting how &#8220;we are entering a world of digital feudalism, where a&nbsp;
    handful of colossal corporate mega-giants rule private empires....
    the top 10 Web sites accounted for 31 percent&nbsp; of US page views in
    2001, 40 percent in 2006, and about 75 percent in 2010...&#8221; (Monthly
    Review, March 2011)". Sorry my numbers were slightly off, and the
    actual facts show an even worse deterioration between 2005 and 2010.
    <br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAKsgsGxoLgCNbEYqp-kHSZ_sDpsac=2DZnC1FHe2QidGzz-=oQ@mail.gmail.com"
      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. &nbsp;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>
    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! 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<br>
    parminder <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAKsgsGxoLgCNbEYqp-kHSZ_sDpsac=2DZnC1FHe2QidGzz-=oQ@mail.gmail.com"
      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">&lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net" target="_blank">parminder@itforchange.net</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc 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 class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
                  <p style="margin-bottom:0cm">Parminder </p>
                </font></span>
              <div>
                <div class="h5">
                  <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 moz-do-not-send="true"
                        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
                        moz-do-not-send="true"
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.&nbsp; </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 moz-do-not-send="true"
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&nbsp; <br>
                      <br>
                    </blockquote>
                    <br>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
            <br>
            _______________________________________________<br>
            discuss mailing list<br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
            <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              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>
  </body>
</html>