Re: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sendingvs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)

From: Wayne E. Bouchard (no email)
Date: Wed Nov 05 2008 - 18:13:17 EST

  • Next message: Scott Weeks: "RE: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sendingvs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)"

    To add to Michael's point, I will say that while US Laws cannot apply
    to a company globally, it is perfectly reasonable for the US govt to
    say "If you wish to do business in this country, your operations
    within the USA will follow these rules." This is how every other
    industry is regulated. Just because the internet is less tangible
    doesn't make this particular sort of regulation any less valid. It
    just has to restrict itself in scope to interactions within US
    goverened territory. (Wherever the physical equipment is, thats the
    country you're in and those are the rules you follow. That has already
    been established.So if something were desired, there is no reason it
    cannot be deemed enforcable.

    -Wayne

    On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 11:03:51PM -0000, wrote:
    > > Are you saying that if any part of a network touches US soil
    > > it can be regulated by the US govt over the entirety of the
    > > network? For my part, this is not an attempt to change the
    > > subject or divert the argument (red herring). It is a valid
    > > question with operational impact.
    >
    > That's not how companies work. What you see as a single
    > company operating a single worldwide network, is actually
    > a web of companies with interlocking directorships and
    > share structures. In each country they will probably have
    > 3 or 4 corporate entities. One owns the network assets,
    > one employs all the people in Sales, another employs
    > the network ops people, and 4th one mops up the other
    > employees and is a holding company for the other three.
    > None of them do any billing because that is all done by
    > subsidiary companies in Luxembourg and Ireland. Etc, etc.
    >
    > This is done for a variety of reasons but regulation is
    > definitely one of them. In most countries you need a
    > licence to operate telecom networks, and the licence
    > holder will be the local operating company, not the
    > head office company that consolidates the ownership
    > underneath a share symbol traded on your favorite stock
    > exchange.
    >
    > Spend some time hanging out with finance and legal people
    > in a big company. You may find it almost as fascinating
    > as designing networks.
    >
    > An additional point is that when one company acquires another
    > and it gets reviewed for potential antitrust issues, this
    > often impacts the company structure because a local regulator
    > wants to see that the local corporate entity is not 100%
    > controlled by a foreign corporation. This makes it easier
    > for the government to target regulations at the domestic
    > entity.
    >
    > --Michael Dillon
    >

    ---
    Wayne Bouchard
    Network Dude
    http://www.typo.org/~web/
    

  • Next message: Scott Weeks: "RE: Internet partitioning event regulations (was: RE: Sendingvs requesting. Was: Re: Sprint / Cogent)"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD