[WSIS CS-Plenary] IPR : Strategic priorities for WGIG

[Federico Heinz]

On Fri, 2005-01-28 at 09:05 +0000, Jonathan Cave wrote:
> In my view, an IG group that did not consider IP would be like a
> traffic authority that ignored land ownership.

Beyond the extreme oversimplification implied in the metaphor, I think
it kind of fails to make your point, precisely because a traffic
authority has no bussiness setting policy on land ownership or its
enforcement. All it cares about is keeping the cars flowing in an
orderly fashion, it is none of its bussiness whether a car's destination
is the driver's property or not.

Let's abandon the metaphor quickly, lest we end up discussing it instead
of the real issue at hand. Internet Governance is about keeping the
internet going smoothly, it's about the rules that are expected from a
good netizen, regardless of where she comes from. Unless we want
software to implement chinese-style censorship installed in all *our*
routers, we should try to keep this governance scope as narrow as
possible, and avoid setting policy on anything that is not strictly
related to the internet as such.

	Fede

-- 
GnuPG Public Key: gpg --keyserver wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net --recv-key BD02C6E0
Key Fingerprint: 04F4 08C5 14B7 2C3D DB21  ACF8 6CF5 0B0C BD02 C6E0
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mailman-new.greennet.org.uk/pipermail/plenary/attachments/20050128/d1cfcbb2/attachment.pgp