[A2k] More Comments on WCIT: Routing Around "Traditional Telecommunications" in the Inter-governmental Context

Seth Johnson seth.p.johnson at gmail.com
Thu Dec 13 08:19:27 PST 2012

(More analysis of what's shaping up at WCIT, including some
recommendations on doing it right -- Seth)

Routing Around “Traditional Telecommunications:”
Further Comments on Preserving the Open Internet at the ITU’s WCIT Proceedings
> http://internetdistinction.com/bricoleur/2012/12/13/35/

By Seth Johnson

Further Analysis

My initial analysis of the contributions of the US Delegation at the
outset of the ITU’s World Conference on International
Telecommunications (WCIT), concluding tomorrow, focused on
highlighting certain discrepancies between the US’s rhetorical stance
of opposition to a new international regulatory regime, increased
control over Internet governance, and censorship, and what the actual
recommended language would actually accomplish.  It shows how the US’s
proposals emphasize a generalized conception of liberalized
competition that if endorsed as part of the frame established by the
ITU would serve to legitimize the failed conception of competition
embodied by the telecommunications regulatory regime in the United
States.  It also illustrates how the US recommendations do not
actually limit the ITU from extending its scope beyond “traditional
telecommunications,” in the way ISOC advocates that they should.
Instead the US’s position provides a broadly-stated frame that lets
the ITU continue the expansive interpretation of its scope that it has
already expressed in its previous proceedings, such as the Geneva and
Tunis Declarations for the World Summit for the Information Society,
and the Hyderabad World Telecommunications Development Conference

In the following I extend my comments to further illustrate the
implications for the open Internet of the US’s position and to
describe how the goal of preserving the Internet’s nature would be
most effectively served.  I first examine the dispute over applying
the International Telecommunications Regulations (ITRs) to “recognized
operating agencies” (ROAs) as the US has advocated, or to all
“operating agencies” (OAs).  I then comment on the generalized
language regarding liberalized competition that the US advocates in
relation to the US incumbents’ conception of telecommunications in the
IP-enabled world as a vertically integrated market.

(see link for more)

More information about the A2k mailing list