Parminder: Read the oped a couple days ago and yes, a very thoughtful analysis. I agree with you: much of the ITU/WCIT conversation is trash talk, designed for more heat than light. I do not believe the ITRs were contemplated as the end game here; there is a larger strategic framework at play. Because any rational analysis will show that proposals that would exact profound change are coming from well, shall we say some unexpected places, notwithstanding the constant mention of the usual bogeymen. However, while I share some of your concerns, some of the stark differences you appear to outline are, in my opinion, much more nuanced. A couple of few things. If we think the commercial interests will dominate, then the needs/aspirations/cultural affinities of Internet users will become central to all propositions. They will follow the money....and act on fact. The locus for Internet growth is the Asia/Pacific and African regions. Ditto the prospects for further development, if only to address the opportunities presented by this fact. So surely the moves of commercial operators mindful of their prospects are going to be heavily mediated by the presence in the space of 2+ billion Chinese and Indians. Trading on these facts alone, for me, the principal traction in the latest round of gTLDs is the improved prospects for Internationalized Domain Names (IDN) it brings to fore. I am convinced that continued growth and development demand collaborations between the interests, North & South, East, West and all points between. All of the old ideas of a uni-polar world goes with it. The very nature, the very idea of the Internet is hostile to hegemony and exceptionalism. I am unanimous that a balanced multistakeholder approach and process to matters Internet is best positioned for successful stewardship. You mentioned two major actions - unbundling software from hardware and common carriage concepts for telecommunications - as major actions that inured to the global public interest. Further examination will show one was initiated by a state actor in a metropolitan country, the other by commercial actors. So on the balance of the facts, I am not yet persuaded that state actors are the best if not the only guarantors of the global public interest. I have a difficulty with the supposition of the public interest as alien and mutually exclusive turf to commercial and civil interests. Best, -Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:22 PM, parminder <parminder@itforchange.net>wrote:
Hi All
I did a lead oped on the ITU-ITRs controversy in the Indian daily 'The Hindu'
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/hyping-one-threat-to-hide-another/artic...
Thought it may interest some of you.
parminder _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org