[wsfii-discuss] Press Release: guifi.net has reached the thousands!

Thu Oct 26 07:14:00 UTC 2006

Good points Julian.

That's right, is not about opening new competition fronts. I was not 
inspired while using the work "battle" there in the very last line, 
suggests a fight with someone else, "challenge" fits much better. I 
meant, there is a need for cooperation here to make neutral networks a 
real alternative, I've seen people arguing that there is no discussion 
because they deny neutral networks existence.

Main point must be kept in that neutral networks doesn't compete with 
anybody/anything by its own nature, and regarding to the actors who 
compete in a market, neutral networks just provide a more fair 
environment to them.

And of course, that neutral networks exists are viable and sustainable.

The challenge (not the battle) is to build examples ;)

Ramon.

En/na Julian Priest ha escrit:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 05:50:24PM +0200, Ramon Roca wrote:
>   
>> Thanks Julian, we do fully share same points of view. I think this is 
>> never will an old thread, instead is one of the main topics.
>> Just let me add a few comments. I'm seeing quite often when talking 
>> about service providers over neutral.networks people do imagine we are 
>> talking about global big ISP. And really that's a part of the story, but 
>> not all.
>> We are experiencing that the openness facilitates a much varied 
>> ecosystem of small and medium enterprises, and that's a quite obvious 
>> opportunities. In fact their support is a key, although their 
>> investments are quite limited or localized to their interests, by 
>> aggregating them is a key of success.
>> By that I mean just network participants, such as farmers, or very 
>> likely any activity with dispersed but local branches or facilities, 
>> like small retailers etc, as well as the universe of service 
>> professionals and local companies who provide services to those SME as 
>> well to the citizens.
>> On neutral networks in some cases they can find better ROI and even 
>> better quality of service.
>> And this have to be taken instead of a competitive issue (neutral 
>> networks never can compete against anybody by its own nature), as a 
>> prove that help in enrich local business in a fair environment.
>>     
>
> That's a key point! - neutral networks never can compete by definition.
>
> Just to clarify where I'm coming from - it's not that I am in favour
> of competition as a method of structuring society or perfectly
> competitive markets as a holy grail - really looking to something beyond
> that thinking..
>
> But as an argument in the current entrenched market orthodoxy showing
> that a neutral network *is* a perfectly competitive market is maybe
> a very powerful stance and a meeting point for discussion with
> regulators and businesses alike.
>
> It's a 'no competition without co-operation' argument something like:
>
>  * a neutral network *is* the market for telecoms services
>
>  * having competing network infrastructures is like having competing markets
>
>  * these competing 'markets' are not open to any actor - locality
>    creates captive 'markets' - vendor lock in
>
>  * you need to co-operate and interoperate to establish this neutral
>    network 'market'
>
>  * the creation of interoperable co-operative open access neutral
>    networks should be mandated by competition law!
>
>   
>> For going there, neutral networks have to gain some credibility, and 
>> very likely a current battle is there.
>>     
>
> Sure - 'competition without co-operation is war' but all I'm saying is
> that maybe there is a chance here of opening a dialog in the current
> language between community/co-operative/freenetworks/municipal
> networks and commercial and regulators rather than yet another front?
>
> :)
>
> cheers
>
> /julian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> wsfii-discuss mailing list
> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>
>
>   