[ccwg-internet-governance] Concluding Notes Re: Choice
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.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 716034 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the ccwg-internet-governance