Subject: Re: rTLDs (was: TLD with Entrance Criteria, then? (LONG!))

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:37:19 -0500 (EST)

Antony Van Covering writes:
> The Internet was, and is, a network of private networks.

 Nonsense Tony. The moment so-called private networks
 allow the general public to utilize their facilities
 to such an extensive degee they alter their status to
 that of de facto utilities. Which means they welcome
 regulation, legal limitations, oversight and account-
 ability. Alleged property rights are, first and foremost
 limited to activities that will no harm the "general
 good". Whatever remaining rights that we the people may
 grant are withdrawn when this transformation from closed,
 private networks is engaged and they become the commons.

 The only tragedy of this commons, though, is the inability
 of libertarians like yourself and Sexton to deal with the
 facts. The Internet is a global public network requiring
 control by the people, for the people and of the people to
 protect us from exploitation, oppression and suppression of
 liberties, rights and freedoms.

 Bob Allisat

 Free Community Network _ [email-masked]
 http://fcn.net _ http://fcn.net/allisat 
 [email-masked]

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 14:37:19 -0500 (EST)

Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:18:52 -0500 (EST)

Jeff Kittle writes:
> Pardon me for saying but was it not the DOD that started the
> arpa project, I believethey are part of the goverment. Everybody 
> has legitimate concerns and everybody is right, but I think there 
> has to be some regulation and control of the internet, sorry, 
> there all ready is to many bad things out there, if nobody can
> see it I'll spell it out, the internet is the foundation of 
> future, it will keep growing and be utilized more and various 
> things that we can not even see yet, so let's build a good 
> foundation now.

 Critical to building this foundation is the safeguarding
 of our civil liberties, human rights and freedoms while
 utilizing the Internet. That will require interventions
 by governments in the form of legislation integrating a
 DIGITAL BILL OF RIGHTS <http://fcn.net> into the statutes
 and laws of nations worldwide. Then laws will have to be 
 appropriately written or revised. This is the foundation
 we require and must demand. We must put an end to all of
 the abuses we are experiencing both by exploitative private
 enterprise and by malicious governments.

 Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:18:52 -0500 (EST)

Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:19:56 -0500 (EST)

I wrote:
> ... The moment so-called private networks allow the
> general public to utilize their facilities to such an
> extensive degee they alter their status to that of de
> facto utilities...

Richard Sexton replied:
+ Which, even if it were true (it's not) is why ISP's
+ make you buy an account. I don't really see a lot
+ of places with signs that that say "This is a free
+ internet connection for the public good."
+ 
+ Youconnect to sombody's *private* network and
+ are subject to their AUP's, and for this you get to use
+ their resources. On of these resources is access to the
+ network.
+ 
+ Show me where the law speaks of this public good stuff, Bob.

 If individuals who share my opinions have anything
 to do with the formation of public policy then the
 laws will come. The Digital Bill of Rights, viewable
 at <http://fcn.net> and legislation reflecting this
 important document will move very swiftly into the
 many various congresses and parliaments if we have
 our way. You have every right to oppose these pointed
 initiatives. But don't be surprised or hurt if you
 thereby leave yourself in a very isolated position
 in the decades ahead. We have inalienable rights,
 freedoms and liberties. These apply equally on the
 Net or elsewhere.

 Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:19:56 -0500 (EST)

Richard Sexton replied:

 Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:22:24 -0500 (EST)

> The Internet was, and is, a network of private networks.

I, Bob Allisat replied:
+ Nonsense Tony. The moment so-called private networks
+ allow the general public to utilize their facilities
+ to such an extensive degee they alter their status to
+ that of de facto utilities. Which means they welcome
+ regulation, legal limitations, oversight and account-
+ ability. Alleged property rights are, first and foremost
+ limited to activities that will no harm the "general
+ good". Whatever remaining rights that we the people may
+ grant are withdrawn when this transformation from closed,
+ private networks is engaged and they become the commons.
+
+ The only tragedy of this commons, though, is the inability
+ of libertarians like yourself and Sexton to deal with the
+ facts. The Internet is a global public network requiring
+ control by the people, for the people and of the people to
+ protect us from exploitation, oppression and suppression of
+ liberties, rights and freedoms.

Fraser Orr writes:
= In what way do they welcome this regulation? Perhaps
= your particular view of society requires them to be
= hamstrung with regulation, etc., nonetheless, I imagine
= you would find no utility company in favor of regulation
= etc., were it not for the fact they are also granted
= guaranteed success, by being made a legally enforced
= monopoly.

 Utilities that began as free wheeling private enterprises
 that evolved into utilities warrenting public regulation
 are numerous and are not necessarily protected monopolies.
 Telephone and natural gas companies, air and bus lines
 are examples of private firms in non-monopoly situations
 that have required many regulatory restrictions and
 provisions guiding the manner in which they can operate.
 Simply because we rely on them as a community and demand
 protection and security. The same sort of sanctions and
 controls will be inevitably be implimented in regards to
 the various companies that form the Internet.

Fraser continues:
= Obviously you are entitled to your particular view of
= society, nonetheless, "commons" usually refers to property
= owned by the state, not the infrastructure of privately
= owned companies, whether they are state controlled
= monopolies or not.

 Services and systems that originally were solely private
 over time become so prevalent that their status changes.
 Some are even absorbed and come under direct ownership 
 of the public. Others fall under serious scrutiny and
 regulation usually after various abuses and even deaths.
 As I discussed above there are numerous examples to refer
 to in history. The Internet will be no differant and the
 resistance of the various capitalist czars of the Net to
 control and regulations should also not be a surprise.

Fraser:
= No one would disagree that the Internet needs controlled,
= nonetheless, the Internet is THE prime example of good
= anarcho-capatilism in action. Control by cooperation,
= not coercion. I can set my computer to have an IP address
= that is registered in the root DNS to "ibm.com". Nobody
= knocks on my door and tells me change it or your going to
= jail. Of course, no ISP worth their salt would allow
= me to connect to their network with such an IP address.
= The point is, unless I cooperate by the democratically
= determined rules, I am greatly hindered, and hadly anyone
= else suffers.
= 
= In what way am I exploited as a user of the Internet? Perhaps
= by the excessive fee of $70 for domain name registration, or
= the fact that I can't call my web site "ibm.com"? I see no
= particular reason why I should be able to control the contents
= of a database owned by a private company, nor why I should
= complain about how much they charge for that entry.
= 
= In what ways am I oppressed, or suppressed? Because I can't
= use 1024 bit encryption technology? Because I can't publish
= pictures of myself naked?
= 
= The reality is that the real oppression and suppression on
= the Internet comes from government interference, not from a
= lack of givernment interference.

 Our rights, liberties and freedoms demand protection
 from both private and public enterprise. However it is
 highly unrealistic to expect those who directly profit
 by abuse and oppression to safeguard the populace. There
 are instruments of government - courts, justice depart-
 ments and public prosecutors - all exist to protect us.
 And, yes, they must also protect us from predatory 
 legislation. 

 If you will examine the DIGITAL BILL OF RIGHTS viewable at
 <http://fcn.net> you will see that what myself and others
 advocate is a comprehensive list of protections and
 guarantees of individuals from all institutional harm.
 Governments have attempted to limit our communications
 in many ways as you note. Commercial ISPs and other
 Internet based corporations are engaged in even greater
 abuses including: mail filtering and censorship, un-
 documented monitoring of communications, WWW usage and
 contents, data-mining and who knows what else. We must
 be protected from them all.

 I advocate universal, comprehensive adoption of the DIGITAL
 BILL OF RIGHTS and legislation that upholds the many clauses
 of this important document. Once more and more regular
 citizens become aware of their perilous position and of the
 many infringements upon their civil activities I suspect 
 the cry will become wider and more powerful.

 Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 12:22:24 -0500 (EST)

I, Bob Allisat replied:

Fraser Orr writes:

Fraser continues:

Fraser:

 Bob Allisat

---

From: Paul Ebersman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 10:06:15 -0800

I guess I must be way too bored this morning if I'm responding to Bob,
but this internal inconsistency is too much...

bob>  Critical to building this foundation is the safeguarding of our
bob>  civil liberties, human rights and freedoms while utilizing the
bob>  Internet. That will require interventions by governments in the
bob>  form of legislation integrating a DIGITAL BILL OF RIGHTS
bob>  <http://fcn.net> into the statutes and laws of nations
				^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
bob>  worldwide. Then laws will have to be appropriately written or
bob>  revised. This is the foundation we require and must demand. We
bob>  must put an end to all of the abuses we are experiencing both by
bob>  exploitative private enterprise and by malicious governments.
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
So your argument is that additional legislation by the "malicious
governments" will actually fix things?

--
			Paul

---

From: Paul Ebersman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 10:06:15 -0800

--
			Paul

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:52:47 -0500 (EST)

> governments" will actually fix things?

 Legislators indeed often pass legislation
 to restrict abuses by industry as well as
 their peers and various instruments or
 offices of government. Prominant and note-
 worthy examples are campaign contribution
 rules and conflict of interest disclosure
 legislation, freedom of information statutes
 and the many anti-bribery and corruption codes
 already in force. 

 By first integrating the concept of digital
 rights into various constitutions and then by
 assiduous writing and re-drafting of legislation
 citizens can indeed recieve greater protection
 from coercive or oppressive government as well
 as private enterprises. *IF* and only if we as
 citizens force our representative to take such
 profoundly important actions. In regards to the
 Internet it means placing government firmly in
 protection of the rights, freedoms and liberties
 of every single solitary and otherwise powerless
 individual. 
 
 As for what those who previously abused or
 exploited us think or say I could care less.
 They are to be fought tooth and nail until we
 secure our digital rights. Whole generations
 have sacrificed themselves to preserve our
 precious liberties... expect no differance
 from the next generation in our struggle to
 attain liberty on the Internet...

 Bob Allisat

---

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 13:52:47 -0500 (EST)

Bob Allisat