IP: a reply to My Thompson on ownership of the web etc

[Dave Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Lynn <lynn () ecgincc com>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2002 12:04:15 -0400
To: thomas.greene () theregister co uk, tim.richardson () theregister co uk,
farber () cis upenn edu
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 ju dure 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 for
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