Subject:
IP: a reply to Mr Thompson on ownership of the web etc
Date: Sun,
11 Aug 2002 11:54:21 -0400
From: Dave
Farber
Reply-To:
To: ip
------ Forwarded
Message
From: Lynn
Date: Sun,
11 Aug 2002 12:04:15 -0400
To: thomas.greene,
tim.richardson
Subject:
reply
In reply
to The Register Guest Opinion:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26612.html
Europe cannot
'take back' what it never owned. It cannot 'take back' the Web. The World
Wide Web was created by Tim Burners-Lee for all Internet users. Hence world
wide as part of the name. It is not called the European Web nor the UK
Web. The Web in fact, is only a part of the Internet. It is a great misconception
to think otherwise. Unfortunately, there are many who believe this misconception.
Mr Thompson
suggests USG lawmakers and corportations, and in fact everyone in the United
States imposes the standards of this country on the Internet. It is not
true. Mr Thompson uses examples such as sharing music and video files thru
P2P networks and the reaction, or over reaction of a group with a vested
interest in increasing their wealth which is dependent on music and video,
along with the lawmakers that either want publicity or may have received
campaign contributions, or who actually believe much of what is being said
as truth. Mr Thompson also uses as an example viruses.
These are
issues which may or may not have an answer technologically, by regulation,
or a change in business, or yet something else. Most viruses can be stopped
fairly easily right now by changing the mail application used to one that
does not run VB scripts or other executables automatically. Of course virus
writers could be clever and create a virus thru other methods.
If the USG
and the People of the United States really thought we could impose our
standards, I am very sure there would be no spam, even from Nigeria. I
would no longer receive spam regarding mortgages, loans, insurance, get
rich quick schemes, office and computer supplies, medicines, enlarging
or enhancing body parts, porn sites, and underage girls. To the best of
my knowledge, most spam originates in Asia. The most effective method of
blocking it is blocking all mail from that part of the world. However,
this also interferes with much legitimate mail. It is also my understanding
that sending spam from those Asian countries is perfectly fine. So we all
deal with it as best we can until a better method is developed. So Mr Thompson's
examples of breaking a law in two countries may not always apply.
The Internet,
as I understand it, was developed by DARPA as ARPANET. This eventually
evolved to the Internet as we know it today. It became a global communications
network. Separately, France developed their own communications network,
which I believe is now integrated by their choice in the global Internet.
Would Mr Thompson deny the benefits of global communication to those that
wish it and benefit from it?
Responsible
Corporations follow local and regional desires, regulations and Court decisions,
as demonstrated by multi-lingual websites, Yahoo not displaying particular
items in France, following EU privacy regulations by companies not physically
in the EU, and more. If a company is not responsible in your opinion, then
say so with your wallet. Don't buy or use their products or services.
The Internet,
as it evolves and becomes more important in our lives. For some, it is
the only source of information outside of what their government allows;
for others, a road to international business; for yet others, communicating
on an international one to one level which results in a greater understanding
of people, opinions, and issues.
Nothing
happens overnight. Even if Rome were to be rebuilt in Internet time, it
would take more than a day.
The Internet
uses many many standards for everything from communication to display of
web pages. The standards du jure are from international standards organizations,
not the USG or any other government. Without standards, there would be
much confusion and very little communication. The de facto standards are
mostly due to peoples choices. At work you may have few choices, but at
home you have many.
For Mr Thompson
and all those concerned with Internet governance and representation, I
strongly suggest getting involved and doing something more than whining
and complaining. It is very easy to do so. Join ICANNatlarge at icannatlarge.com
(name may be changed soon). This is a grassroots organization in the formative
stages. Presently there are members from over 70 countries. It costs nothing
to join.
As to Mr
Thompsons issues with freedom in the United States, I agree some elected
officials have problems. If enough people agree, those officials will be
voted out of office. Bad laws and regulations are tested in Court and tossed.
It may take time, but the system generally works well. Mr Thompson, and
others have the option of never entering the United States or using any
part of the USG or corporations part of the Internet for least exposure,
or no exposure to anything he may consider offensive, unfair, or anything
else.
If the United
States is so bad, who do so many from all parts of the world seek to live
here? To my knowledge, they are not forced.
As to the
permissive nature of the net, Mr Thompson appears to object both to regulation
and permissiveness. Mr Thompson objects to US Corporations setting the
rules for the Internet, calling it 'technological imperialism'. No
one is stopping other entities from the same. In fact in such places as
China, the government decides what is acceptable for Chinese citizens.
They see a different view of the Internet. As to regulation, I see that
decided in many Courts (including non-US) and international arbitration.
Mr Thompson suggests there are enough laws and regulations in each country
to effectively deal with issues and problems. I see that used in various
areas.
Mr Thompson
asks 'Why, then, do we act as if our interactions with screen, mouse and
keyboard are different?'. Most don't. Offline scams are ported online.
Email eliminates the juggle of time zones for communication and leaves
a trail for those who might otherwise forget. Web sites provide brochure
type of information or the ability to order products or services 24/7/365.
Information is transferred faster than via plane or boat.
Mr Thompson
calls for an Internet regulated in each country. To some extent, in some
countries, that is happening now. It is not the future. Mr Thompson appears
to write about all the negatives of the Internet. What about all the positives?
People that now are friends, work together, and more.
On a very
personal level, I think if Mr Thompson had friends or family in the WTC,
at the Pentegon, in any of those geographical areas or on a plane last
11 Sep he would have been very grateful for access to those here or information,
survivors lists, email or other messages from people saying they survived
as close to immediately as possible. If each country had their 'own' Internet,
such communication may not have been possible.
If the USG
did not have such a great influence, what entity then would Mr Thompson
suggest? The former Soviet Union? China? Iraq? EU? The people of those
countries? In that respect one government is substituted for another, possibly
with a very repressive one. A business? So they can regulate themselves
to do as
they wish?
I think
the Internet belongs to all those that presently use it, with future generations
of users. We must be careful in how we proceed with governance.
On the Internet,
just as offline, there is both good and bad. Much is subjective. The Internet
is constantly evolving answering many needs faster, easier, and less expensive
than other methods. If the Internet was not global, I would not have read
his opinion, nor reply with mine.
Mr Thompson
states the United States is incapable of particular understanding. Don't
underestimate us. Don't insult us either. If the United States is so incapable,
then other countries should stop asking the US to step in and resolve problems
- anything from food to medical care to politics.
The Internet
was originally developed with funding from the USG. We shared this with
the world. You don't have to use it. If you don't like it, create your
own Internet. You can encourage separation with it rather than understanding
different cultures, I won't.
Oh, and
Mr Thompson, unless there is something better, I will stick with the US
Consititution. I appreciate it.
Lynn Bernstein
www.ecg-incc.com
------ End
of Forwarded Message
|
