> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Richard Hill via InternetPolicy <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] [Chapter-delegates] What ISOC is doing
> Date: 13 July 2021 at 10:40:30 CEST
> To: "'Stephen Farrell'" <[email protected]>, 
> <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: Richard Hill <[email protected]>
> 
> Please see embedded comments below.
> 
> Thanks and best,
> Richard
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: InternetPolicy [mailto:[email protected]] On
>> Behalf Of Stephen Farrell via InternetPolicy
>> Sent: Tuesday, 13 July 2021 03:50
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [Internet Policy] [Chapter-delegates] What ISOC is doing
>> 
> 
> SNIP
> 
>> But maybe let's consider your earlier
>> analogy: perhaps a "walled garden" is no longer an accurate enough
>> descriptor - would it be more accurate (albeit perhaps far too emotive)
>> to describe such deployments as "colonial powers"? 
> 
> Yes, that's a fair analogy, but a better one is the classic abuse of dominant 
> market power, as in the railroads in the US in the late 19th century, or in 
> monopoly telecoms in the 1960's.
> 
>> After all, once such
>> a service gets big enough, it can end up exercising a lot of control
>> over IXP, ISP and endpoint behaviours and similar, even if
>> "colonisation" is not at all a goal of the relevant folks. 
> 
> 
> The reason that I keep referring to proposals presented in trade negotiations 
> is that I (and many others) see those proposals as being intended to 
> perpetuate the current "colonization" and cast it in stone in binding 
> international treaties.
> 
> That's one of the things that keeps me awake at night.
> 
> SNIP
> 
>>> "Users" is a broad category and might not only be the "eyeballs" we
>>> often think of.
>> 
>> Indeed. I like how RFC8890 (section 2) tried to cover that.
> 
> Here is a bit from Section 3 of that RFC (citing 4.1 of RFC 3935):
> 
> | The Internet isn't value-neutral, and neither is the IETF.  We
>   |  want the Internet to be useful for communities that share our
>   |  commitment to openness and fairness.  We embrace technical
>   |  concepts such as decentralized control, edge-user empowerment and
>   |  sharing of resources, because those concepts resonate with the
>   |  core values of the IETF community.  These concepts have little to
>   |  do with the technology that's possible, and much to do with the
>   |  technology that we choose to create.
> 

_______________________________________________
nexa mailing list
[email protected]
https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa

Reply via email to