<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>I've been watching this thread. It's another cycle of
conversations that have occurred previously, and that were
ignored.</p>
<p>Let's face it: Internet governance of today is a mud made from
several elements, among which are:<br>
</p>
<p> - Pollyanna-ish naivete about "netizens" and 1960's Grateful
Dead theories of how we can all live together in peace and perfect
harmony.</p>
<p> - Clever, hard-nosed, profit oriented opportunists.</p>
<p> - Reagan/Thatcher notions that regulation by a government is
bad, but regulation by a private body is good (and completely
non-informed by consideration of the excesses of private bodies
ranging from the British East India Company to Standard Oil to
Google.)</p>
<p> - The abandonment of the belief that governance ought to be by
the people and for the people and replacement of that belief with
one that elevates selected (often industrial) "stakeholders" into
positions of inflated influence and control.</p>
<p>I've written several pieces about how we ought to re-read things
from the late 18th century regarding structuring governance so
that it is somewhat self-limiting.</p>
<p>But the most important is this:</p>
<p>
<blockquote type="cite">First Law of the Internet<br>
<br>
+ Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way<br>
that is privately beneficial without being publicly<br>
detrimental.<br>
<br>
- The burden of demonstrating public detriment shall<br>
be on those who wish to prevent the private use.<br>
<br>
- Such a demonstration shall require clear and<br>
convincing evidence of public detriment.<br>
<br>
- The public detriment must be of such degree and extent<br>
as to justify the suppression of the private activity.</blockquote>
</p>
<p>There are other things from the past, such as this from 2004:</p>
<p><u><i>Structural Principles For Internet Governance </i></u>-
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/igf-structural-principles-for-internet-governance.pdf">https://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/igf-structural-principles-for-internet-governance.pdf</a><u><i><br>
</i></u></p>
<p>And see my list of other short essays (or blog items) under the
heading "Internet Governance" at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.cavebear.com/documents/">https://www.cavebear.com/documents/</a></p>
<p>BTW, I agree with Evan regarding ICANN's "nominating committee";
it is a relic, a techno-paternalist chunk of machinery that seems
almost as if lifted from a 19th century colonial playbook written
by King Leopold or Queen Victoria.</p>
<p> --karl--<br>
</p>
<p><u><i><br>
</i></u></p>
</body>
</html>