[ccwg-internet-governance] Concluding Notes Re: Choice

Tamer Rizk trizk at inficron.com
Thu Aug 21 14:49:56 UTC 2014


As we perceive a ubiquitous digitization of our environments, the 
Internet is quickly becoming the Defacto conduit for information 
including email, news, video, applications, and documents. If 
communication is the means of relaying or exchanging information, then 
today, the Internet is communication. The implicit potency of domain 
names to elicit behavior patterns in users, on behalf of their owners, 
is portrayed as value by the premium commanded by domains that relate 
common vocabulary to category ownership.

Ambiguity mandated by the suffixing of traditional top-level labels, 
such as .com and .org, serves as a buffer to the effects of term 
ownership on the psychology of perception and on the permeance of the 
root. The power of association imparted to example.com relative to 
another.example.com today pales in comparison to that of "example" 
relative to example.com tomorrow. Any claim that root zone management or 
maintenance is not susceptible to eventual misdirection by compounded 
interests due to a generalization of root labels is offset by the 
progressive introduction of consequential gTLDs to the global root, as 
they diminish local spheres of influence.

As revenues from the new gTLD program work to incentivize normative 
relativism in propulsion of industry, entities will naturally reinvest 
in establishing their brands as authorities for the labels they control. 
Inevitably, the disappearance of the dot prefixing domain names becomes 
just as plausible as the fate of the dot suffixing domain names, through 
any number of applicable venues. Thus, the current trajectory towards 
Internet governance is predictive of a private organization adjudicating 
direct, exclusive reference to common words between entities vying to 
monopolize a category in communication.

At the heart of the US Government's conditions for transition is an 
underlying desire to avert the misdirection of economic determinability 
as such may benefit a few at the expense of many, including itself. The 
only viable way to ensure that an organization remains impervious to an 
amalgamation of interests is to render that organization economically 
indecisive, insomuch as outcomes are predicated by the actions of 
another independent organization respectively driven by competing 
interests. Willfully imposing neutrality by carefully honing 
organizations in concert effectively negates offensive takeover, 
contrary to tactics requiring overt latitude.

Internet governance is not a construct that can be physically 
transferred. It is the earned will of e pluribus unum, as signaled by 
widespread accord throughout a diverse set of communities in response to 
the prudent establishment of institutions that are structured to reflect 
the granular interests of their constituencies and empowered to operate 
the levers of control over one another in the direction of public service.

/TR/

http://www.radialbasis.com/posts/concluding-notes-re-choice
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Concluding-Notes-Re-Choice.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 716034 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ccwg-internet-governance/attachments/20140821/174e0909/Concluding-Notes-Re-Choice-0001.pdf>


More information about the ccwg-internet-governance mailing list