[Chapter-delegates] Jason's comments on ISOC becoming active in standards

[Kolubahzizi T. Howard]

Dave, very articulated and to the point. You've made the case well.
Kind regards.
 Kolubahzizi T. Howard 
Director of Strategy
Liberia Telecommunications Authority (LTA) 
+231-776200000/+231880539961/+231-555660001 

    On Saturday, August 6, 2016 4:26 PM, Dave Burstein <daveb at dslprime.com> wrote:
 

 ​Eric​

 However, as Jason asked, why would we want to prop up government-lead competitors to open SDO’s like the IETF?

​Fair question. ​Even though ISOC has taken off the home page "The Internet is for everyone," that to me remains the key goal.
​0) Because by showing up, we can bring these organizations much closer to the goals we share of transparency, openness, and representation. (Call that multi-stakeholder if you prefer.) I've personally observed you can make a difference if you get involved, are articulate, and are well-informed on the technology issues.​
​1) Because IETF hasn't (so far) taken the initiative on many of the key issues that changes the cost of connecting to the Internet. Most of those connecting today do so via smartphones, LTE & Wi-Fi, where (many) decisions at standards drive up the costs and reduce security & trust. Eric, Jason - can we move these to IETF? I would support you.
2) Because to get things done, it helps to be heard where the action is. ​Issuing grand statements to the converted is fine; without active work that changes things, we have no impact. Half of the Wi-Fi spectrum could be taken over by the telcos under the 3GPP current plans. Smartphone prices could double under the royalty rules prevalent there. 
3) The standards groups, including the ITU Study Groups, have very little government role in fact. They are dominated by corporations, especially large multinationals we all know and love. The main exception is when the U.S. gets involved on behalf of our security interests. The U.S. also sometimes gets involved to back up our companies, per Ambassador David Gross. On issues that affect the cost of access, the companies drive the decisions.
4) Sometimes, from some companies, the corporations support people - including Jason - who put the public good first. Generally, corporate delegates will not vote against their employers interests. You don't have to be a leftist to acknowledge that generally the corporate interest is higher prices that lead to higher profits. There's an important exception: Google makes their money selling ads and the corporate interest is to bring down costs and get people connected. But most of the powerful companies sell products and services and benefit often from higher prices. Same for royalties.​5) The state hasn't withered away in my lifetime. Until we have revolutions embodying the deep principles of libertarian or communal ideals, not engaging means the states and the corporations so often controlling them have more power, not less.
6) Because while a welcoming big tent is appealing, most of the decisions that make a difference ​do affect someone's profits. That's why we need people who put the public interest first, to step up.
Jason, Eric - are these not relevant factors? I just don't see IETF taking the leading role on so many of these crucial issues. 
Dave Burstein


-- 
Editor, Fast Net News, Net Policy News and DSL Prime
Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley) and Web Video: Making It Great, Getting It Noticed (Peachpit)
_______________________________________________
As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed
to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society
Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org

  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20160806/378a40b8/attachment.htm>