Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Harms Project Draft
- To: Eric Brunner-Williams <ebw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Harms Project Draft
- From: Volker Greimann <vgreimann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 21:08:38 +0200
This "I hope everyone who still opposed anything beyond 15% will contribute
their fears in form of more or less concrete harms as well, so we can start
discussing solutions instead of problems" errs in overlooking harms that
may exist where cross-ownership is 15% or less.
Actually, this was exactly one of the points I was trying to make for a
while now. Harms will exist regardless of CO. So we need to fix the
harms instead of promoting an artificial limitation that will not
prevent any harms in itself.
Actually, If you want to make these points, you are free to do so. I
think everyone who fears a specific harm should detail that harm as best
he can for this list. This harms list should, in my view include
advocacy for that harm (in the sense of showing everyone the danger, not
actually promoting the harm as good).
This "I specifically did not mention market power ..." and this "I did
specifically leave out is the strategy of auctions ..." errs in assuming
that the first is not a relevant condition not univerally present, and
errs in assuming that something attributable to a RACK proponent (and we
don't even know who wrote the ad copy) is (a) relevent to this WG's mission,
(b) binding on any RACK proponent, or (c) a controlling authority.