Interesting - the political power of perception, as opposed to the technical power of actual control...
>>> Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> 9/11/2005 3:48 pm >>>
Tim is a professor of law at Columbia University who is visiting this semester at Stanford University.
Jonathan's earlier email is here:http://www.politechbot.com/2005/11/08/jonathan-zittrain-on/
-Declan
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Jonathan Zittrain on U.N., Net governance: "I don't get it"
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:01:35 -0800From: Tim Wu <wu@pobox.com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Declan,
A response to Jonathan.
I agree with JZ about most things. But I think the reason that the rootmatters is more subtle than he thinks. It has less to do, I think, withactual technological power, and more to do with murky questions of legitimacy, authority, and the evolving balance of power among nations.
Control of the root matters, I'm saying, because people think it matters,and also because it could matter. The first point is a point about the legitimacy of government action. My sense is that because much of the internet's infrastructure is still under American sovereign control(including the root) countries have a sense that regulating the internet is always to challenge the sovereignty of the United States. So long as Americans believe -- as many do -- that in some deeper sense this is still our network, policies like China will always seem an affront. Even far less radical policies in Europe may spark a confrontation.
What non-US countries are trying to do, then, is erode any perception thatthe Internet within their borders is the U.S. Internet. The root remains a symbol, in other words, of persistent American interest, and they want that changed.
Second, the root and naming and numbering could matter more than it does now. I think we may come to see a day where internet membership is heavily qualified - where getting an IP address becomes conditional on good behavior. So long as the numbering authority remains at some level the entity that controls who owns what numbers, its control over membership will continue to have nagging importance.
JZ is right that a Dr. Evil takeover wouldn't mean no more email. But like, say, possession of some holy relic, root control has an undeniable influence on claims to legitimately regulate the Net, and ultimately on the balance of power surrounding the internet.
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
>>> Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> 9/11/2005 3:48 pm >>>
Tim is a professor of law at Columbia University who is visiting this semester at Stanford University.
Jonathan's earlier email is here:http://www.politechbot.com/2005/11/08/jonathan-zittrain-on/
-Declan
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Politech] Jonathan Zittrain on U.N., Net governance: "I don't get it"
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 19:01:35 -0800From: Tim Wu <wu@pobox.com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
Declan,
A response to Jonathan.
I agree with JZ about most things. But I think the reason that the rootmatters is more subtle than he thinks. It has less to do, I think, withactual technological power, and more to do with murky questions of legitimacy, authority, and the evolving balance of power among nations.
Control of the root matters, I'm saying, because people think it matters,and also because it could matter. The first point is a point about the legitimacy of government action. My sense is that because much of the internet's infrastructure is still under American sovereign control(including the root) countries have a sense that regulating the internet is always to challenge the sovereignty of the United States. So long as Americans believe -- as many do -- that in some deeper sense this is still our network, policies like China will always seem an affront. Even far less radical policies in Europe may spark a confrontation.
What non-US countries are trying to do, then, is erode any perception thatthe Internet within their borders is the U.S. Internet. The root remains a symbol, in other words, of persistent American interest, and they want that changed.
Second, the root and naming and numbering could matter more than it does now. I think we may come to see a day where internet membership is heavily qualified - where getting an IP address becomes conditional on good behavior. So long as the numbering authority remains at some level the entity that controls who owns what numbers, its control over membership will continue to have nagging importance.
JZ is right that a Dr. Evil takeover wouldn't mean no more email. But like, say, possession of some holy relic, root control has an undeniable influence on claims to legitimately regulate the Net, and ultimately on the balance of power surrounding the internet.
_______________________________________________
Politech mailing list
Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/)
posted by Patrick Henry at 4:18 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home