From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sun Nov 1 00:12:12 2015 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 15:12:12 +1100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] NOTE - Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10 In-Reply-To: <8587F3C3-613F-4596-B959-25BB895DB88E@gp-digital.org> References: <5634446D.9060505@itforchange.net> <56347293.7090103@itforchange.net> <56347496.9040002@itforchange.net> <00172661A97441C685D1A0F64770BB66@Toshiba> <8587F3C3-613F-4596-B959-25BB895DB88E@gp-digital.org> Message-ID: <66C8D3AEA0D54D689C237C151898B7E0@Toshiba> Hi Lea, I was involved in the process last year, which was a little different. Quite a number of civil society people were among those who put their names forward for the selection committee and were among the 18 or so who participated in a slightly messy voting process with confusing spreadsheets and 70 or so candidates. Among the CS people who participated here were myself, Analia, Anriette, Richard Hill, Parminder, Avri. Of the above, to my knowledge, only Analia myself and Anriette took the opportunity to participate in the conference call which spent most if its time eliminating WEOG males who dominated the original voting process. We were able to get some good civil society names up, and also speak successfully against some less satisfactory reps from other constituencies. But that was a less organised process than this appears to be, where decision making was really left to those who bothered to participate in the call. I think everyone realised it was far from satisfactory for a number of reasons. As regards other avenues for CS participation – I confess I had not heard of the TFMA, and noone else on CSCG raised it. I guess this is one of the reasons why I feel someone else should take over my role, as I am becoming less involved and aware of the various fora evolving in this space which civil society should be actively involved in. Ian From: Lea Kaspar Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2015 9:42 PM To: Ian Peter Cc: parminder ; mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] NOTE - Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10 Hi Ian, Parminder, Thanks for putting this on our agenda. Not against taking a stand on this. We have precedent with the IGF MAG, so could point to that. Although not ideal, UN DESA did take on 9/10 CSCG recommendations in the last MAG intake. And seeing as the MAG selection process is still something that needs improvement, we could leverage this effort (if successful) in the next round of MAG nominations. Going beyond the principle, I'd also be interested to hear from CS who were sitting on the selection committee for the July WSIS event (I think the UN used the same selection mechanism). Did that work at all? Would the final selection of CS reps at the July event been different had CS had control over the process? While we're on the topic, Ian, does the CSCG actively monitor UN calls for CS representation in relevant spaces? For instance, did the CSCG ever discuss the call for nominations for the Adis Ababa Technology Facilitation Mechanism Advisory Group? The call has now passed (last weekend I think), and IMO it's a real shame that we didn't have a broader CS discussion about this. The TFM is passing under people's radar, but could end up being influential in the broader IG ecosystem. Best wishes, Lea Sent from my iPhone On 31 Oct 2015, at 08:08, Ian Peter wrote: Is there general agreement we should write something pointing this out and asking for a process where CS chooses its own reps? Perhaps we could ask for UNDESA to forward CS names submitted to us and we will advise our choices? Interested in other opinions on this.... we would have to move quickly... From: parminder Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2015 6:58 PM To: Ian Peter ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] NOTE - Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10 This is what para 3 of part I of the section on roadmap of the NetMundial outcome document says: "Stakeholder representatives appointed to multistakeholder Internet governance processes should be selected through open , democratic, and transparent processes. Different stakeholder groups should self - manage their processes based on inclusive, publicly known, well defined and accountable mechanisms." (Emphasis added) On Saturday 31 October 2015 01:19 PM, parminder wrote: On Saturday 31 October 2015 12:47 PM, Ian Peter wrote: Hi Parminder, While I agree with your analysis, Ian, I am not sure you are seeing it the way I am. This is not about 4-5 of us getting a few minutes from the podium. This is about civil society representation will be chosen in the IG space. And if you really feel it the way i do, why would you not agree to write as such to those in charge of the process. I don’t think there is any chance at all that this process will be changed in the short timeframe involved, however strong a protest we make. As I said, it does not matter if it changes. There is a larger structural point here. On the other hand, I am about 90 percent sure that if all groups involved in CSCG writes that this is not right, and please let us do our own selection they would agree. Civil society seems to have forgotten to leverage its legitimacy, and we seem to cave in to just about everything, a being beyond us to influence. This is not how it should be at all, So my own thoughts are that it is probably best to get involved, and from that position make a strong statement that the process is flawed and problematic from our point of view. Are you saying that the chosen speakers will speak from the podium that this process is flawed, and in this way? Please be clear. But if we are ready to have our speakers speak about it at the high level meeting, why would we not want to write about it to the co-facilitators and the concerned UN bureaucracy? Isnt that much simpler, and at least have the potential of meaningful impact. I also feel that we should be involved because in doing so we are able to correct some excesses from our point of view, but certainly not all. Again, did not understand. What excesses, and how are they corrected? However that’s just a personal point of view. We have just opened a discussion on this in CSCG and decisions may be quite different. One problem is that CSCG as such cannot nominate. Those who can according to this process are: These criteria are for those individuals who want to apply to be on the multistakeholder selection committee. My proposal is to disassociate CS selection from this multistakeholder selection process, and ask for CSCG to do it (I find it highly likely that they'd agree). So, the issue of the creteria you mention simply does not apply to the proposal I am making and seeking your and other people's views on. Non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council • Organizations accredited to the World Summit on the Information Society held in Geneva (2003) and Tunis (2005) • Organizations accredited to the WSIS Forum held from 2011 to 2015 • Organizations with observer status with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development • Attendees of the UNESCO WSIS+10 - ICT4D Conference or the UNESCO WSIS - Connecting the Dots Conference • Organizations accredited to the Financing for Development (FFD) process • Organizations accredited to the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit 2015 • Organizations already accredited to the WSIS+10 process (July and October meetings) So if CSCG as such is involved, it will have to be with our nominations as representatives of civil society organisations who do fit one at least of the above criteria. I am not asking for the CSCG to get involved with this multistakeholder selection process. On the contrary, I am asking for us to disassociate from it. Another problem is that the time frame for selecting speakers is roughly that of IGF – and with a 15 hour estimated commitment it may not be easy to find people able to represent us. I believe that if we are involved we should try to fill both civil society slots on the selection panel. But that will have to be as two separate nominations (backed by CSCG) from different CS groups. Again, you are speaking of CSCG getting involved with the current process, which is fundamentally different from my proposal to ask for CS nominations to be taken off the multistakeholder process, and be taken over by CSCG itself. Same about the rest of your email below. Ian, lets look at it in two parts. Do the involved CS groups agree that other stakeholders - big business, gov, ICANN/ ISOC - should not be involved in selection of its reps? Yes or no. If yes, then let us that put down in a letter. I am happy to fight the case, but if we have such a position and want to fight the case. We cannot keep citing expediency for just everything. But if we are ok with such a process, that is a different matter, and let different groups and individuals give their views... Their has to be some limit to - we agree it is wrong, but.... parminder And if we do nominate representatives on the selection panel, we have to do so this week. And if I may add a further factor – I will be stepping down as the Independent Chair of CSCG shortly, as my term expires soon. I will not be standing again, as various factors are making it difficult for me to maintain an active involvement in these forums; and I think it is time for one of our very talented (and younger) members to take over. CSCG is currently drafting an EOI to seek a new independent Chair, with the aim of opening that process before IGF so that people get a chance to discuss it while many are present in Brazil. So the replacement process hopefully will complete by the end of this year. So in these circumstances – it would be good to hear from anyone who has an interest in working with CSCG as part of this particular process; I don’t necessarily want to be involved if we have good reps able to consult with CSCG members. If anyone is interested in this and wants to contact me privately to assist in this way, I would be happy to discuss further and approach CSCG as regards their involvement. Thanks for opening up a discussion on this. Ian Peter From: parminder Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2015 3:32 PM To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [bestbits] NOTE - Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10 Please see the below announcement. It seems that there is a strong effort to institutionalise a system of civil society reps for speaker roles, but perhaps later also for more substantive roles, being selected by multistakeholder committees, meaning that big business and technical community gets a veto over civil society rep selection. (Do remember here that 'technical community' here is not that odd free and open software group volunteering their time in supporting government schools or the such. This term is accepted in the IG world now to denote those who work for and represent organisations engaged with technical governance of the Internet, and thus represent a governance status quo group. The semantic confusion about the term, as being people with technical capacities, is deliberate in order to utilise a certain legitimacy for what is a power based governance system.) The structural problem with such a process should be obvious. This is not acceptable for me, my organisation and the networks that I work with. Civil society has traditionally been fiercely protective of its independence, which includes the right to choose its own nominees (for instance, any efforts at national govs 'clearing' civil society reps from their countries has been strongly resisted at the UN and other global governance levels). I think we need to write back to those responsible for this process that , thanks but no thanks, you tell us how many CS sepakers you want and we have a process of selection for CS reps and we will deliver the names by the date you want. May I appeal to Ian and the CSCG to frame and send such a letter to WSIS process co-facilitators, and the concerned UN bureaucracy, at the earliest. Before these mentioned deadlines pass. Meanwhile, let me give some background on this.... Just Net Coalition did write a letter addressed to the co-facilitators against such a process of big business sitting over decisions on CS reps. It seems to have had no effect. A few years back, there was an attempt by a certain group in the IGF MAG, led by the then Exec Director of the IGF, Markus Kummer, to institute a method of selections of non gov MAG members by a committee of older non gov MAG members. I was able to attend MAG meetings in those days as a Special Advisor to the chair. I opposed such a process of CS nominee selection by a committee that included big business and technical community (read the ICANN/ ISOC system). I was able to get the support of a few CS MAG members in the room, and I distinctly remember Graciala, Katitza, and Foaud in this regard, and perhaps a person or two more whose names may have dropped from my memory (my apologies).... And because of the CS opposition this problematic move had to be abandoned. Now it seems to be coming back from another door, and we need to stand up against it once again. Again, we have very little turnaround time here. parminder On Friday 30 October 2015 08:04 PM, Carolina Rossini wrote: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: NGO News Date: Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:14 AM Subject: [NGO News:] Call for Nomination: Stakeholder Speakers at the General Assembly High-level Meeting on WSIS+10 To: crossini at publicknowledge.org Deadlines: 8 November 2015: Apply for Selection Committee 12 November 2015: Apply for Speaking Roles The General Assembly High-level Meeting on the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society will take place on 15-16 December 2015 at the UN Headquarters in New York. This high-level meeting will provide an opportunity for in-depth discussions on important issues in the implementation of the WSIS outcomes, including the progress, gaps and challenges, as well as areas for future actions. To apply to speak at the High-level Meeting, please complete the form available here. Applications will be accepted from 30 October to 12 November 2015. A Selection Committee will be established in order to ensure broad and inclusive participation of stakeholders in the high-level meeting. Applications to the Selection Committee will be accepted from 30 October to 8 November 2015. To learn more about the Selection Committee, please see the Terms of Reference by clicking on this link. To apply to participate in the stakeholder Selection Committee, please complete the form available here. Background In December of 2003, the world came together in Geneva at the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) to declare a "common desire and commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society," and ushered in an era of harnessing the power of information and communication technology to contribute to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). The resulting Geneva Plan of Action established targets and the eleven action lines, which guide development in specific areas. The second phase of WSIS, conducted in Tunis in 2005, built upon the achievements of the Geneva Plan, with the resulting Tunis Agenda addressing additional issues, such as financing and internet governance. Paragraph 111 of the Tunis Agenda, endorsed by the General Assembly in resolution 60/252, requested the General Assembly to undertake the overall review of the implementation of the outcomes of WSIS in 2015. In response, the General Assembly in resolution 68/302, decided that the overall review will be concluded by a two-day high-level meeting of the General Assembly, to be preceded by an intergovernmental process that also takes into account inputs from all relevant stakeholders of WSIS. -- Carolina Rossini Vice President, International Policy and Strategy Public Knowledge http://www.publicknowledge.org/ + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -- Carolina Rossini Vice President, International Policy Public Knowledge http://www.publicknowledge.org/ + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 21:05:49 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 21:05:49 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] 10 days left Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: NGO News Date: Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 10:41 AM Subject: [NGO News:] Only 10 days left to register for the High-level meeting of the General Assembly on WSIS+10 review on 15-16 December 2015 To: crossini at publicknowledge.org Dear Representative, If you have not already done so, you are cordially invited to register to take part in the *High-level meeting of the General Assembly on WSIS+10 review*, to be held at United Nations Headquarters in New York on 15-16 December 2015. The General Assembly, in its resolution 68/302 on the modalities for the overall review by the Assembly of the implementation of the outcomes of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), decided that the overall review will be concluded by a two-day high-level meeting of the Assembly, to be preceded by an intergovernmental preparatory process that also takes into account inputs from all relevant stakeholders of the World Summit on the Information Society. Please register by filling out the form here . The deadline for registration is *13 November 2015 5:00PM EST* (New York time). The event will be web cast live at http://webtv.un.org/ and videos of the sessions will be available in the archive at that link for later viewing. The website for the WSIS review is: http://unpan3.un.org/wsis10/ *Please note that this Invitation is non-transferable. Travel funding is not available from the United Nations for stakeholders participating in this event. * Yours sincerely, NGO Branch Office for ECOSOC Support and Coordination UN-DESA -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy and Strategy * *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Sat Nov 14 09:55:27 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 10:25:27 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] The Internet Social Forum initiative In-Reply-To: <56462AE5.1090204@eff.org> References: <5643ED96.3020705@itforchange.net> <5645F6AF.8080304@riseup.net> <56462AE5.1090204@eff.org> Message-ID: <56474B5F.9050407@riseup.net> Dear Jeremy, yes, this is a correct position. I have to concentrate my critique to the organisation ISF and mostly all people understand, what i mean. It is enough. I was angry about the text of parminder. And this emotion breaks the rules in your list. But we should be clear, that any organisation is always the result of the activity of the people. The organisation, any form of this, do not exist. Only the active people exist. I think, that also in the IGF lists, like bestbits or governance, we need a strong discussion about, how we can create a real InterNet, an Internet for the people and not for capitalistic instances. And this discussion we can start in the space of the World Social Forum. In all IGF lists we have a high level of experience and knowledge. This can be very helpful for us in the process of creation a real InterNet. Please, excuse my emotional reaction. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela Am 13/11/2015 um 01:54 p.m. schrieb Jeremy Malcolm: > Please no ad hominem attacks on the Best Bits list. Non-personal > critiques of particular initiatives of any kind are otherwise OK if > relevant. But personal criticisms, whatever the source or target, are > grounds for suspension from the list from now on. This rule has not > been consistently applied in the past, but the results of our recent > Best Bits survey give a clear mandate for the administrators to take a > firmer hand in handling ad hominem attacks on the list. > > Thanks. > > On 13/11/2015 11:41 AM, willi uebelherr wrote: >> (please: I use the lists for IUF and IGF, if i am member in this list. >> If you answer, please check your membership) >> >> Dear friends. >> >> 1) I do not understand, why parminder append the texts and do not >> write the link. He do not understand the principles of text-exchange >> in our digital communication. >> >> Call For ISF >> http://internetsocialforum.net/isf/?page_id=848 >> Tunis Resolution >> http://internetsocialforum.net/isf/?page_id=832 >> >> 2) Parminder wrote: >> "As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of >> the World Social Forum..." >> >> Never this group can create a thematic forum of the World Social Forum >> for Internet. With this censors and autocrats like Norbert Bollow, >> Richard Hill and Michael Gurstein never we can create a World Internet >> Forum as a thematic forum of the WSF(FSM). It is a group of selfish >> oriented people, they support the Internet Governance. They support >> the centralized controll of the Internet. They speak about self >> organizing, but never they like it. And never they want accept it. >> >> We have to be clear, that the World Social Forum is a forum of the >> people in our world, on our planet. And not only the people from >> Europe or North America. Therefore, a World Internet Forum can only >> arise based on the people on our planet, based on equality, based on >> an open and free discussion. And not in this "clandestino" form like >> the ISF (Internet Social Forum). >> >> For our free InterNet, the free Interconnection of local Networks, >> based on the local/regional self organized creation of this transport >> system for digital data in packet form, we need the open space for our >> philosophical and technical design principles. It have to be a process >> in our space of free technology. Free to participate, free to use for >> all people on our planet. Then, and only then, the people local can >> create his part of the global digital interconnection for all people. >> Free and gratis. >> >> many greetings, willi >> Coro, Venezuela >> >> >> -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- >> Betreff: [governance] The Internet Social Forum initiative >> Datum: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:08:30 +0530 >> Von: parminder >> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org , >> BestBitsList , Forum at Justnetcoalition. >> Org >> >> All >> >> There will be a brief presentation at the IGF of the Internet Social >> Forum initiative, and taking of questions and inputs, in an half an hour >> session on Friday the 13th in workshop room 2 at 2 PM. >> >> As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of >> the World Social Forum, It is planned to be held sometime late 2016. >> >> All are invited to come. >> >> parminder >> >> PS: Enclosed the initial call for an ISF, and the 'Tunis Call for a >> People's Internet' adopted at a workshop on the ISF initiative at the >> Worls Social Forum in Tunis is March 2015 >> >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > From jmalcolm at eff.org Sat Nov 14 15:10:28 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 18:10:28 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] Civil Society Coordination Group - chair and BB representative positions open Message-ID: <56479534.8000609@eff.org> Thanks to those who came to the Best Bits meeting last week. With all of the ensuing activity at the IGF, we have not yet managed to put together a report of the meeting, but this will be sent soon (along with some photos of the event). However there is one item that had been on the agenda for the final session of the day that I neglected to bring up, and this was about the Civil Society Coordination Group, which is the small group of representatives of civil society networks in the Internet governance space that coordinates joint nomination of civil society representatives for positions such as the IGF MAG. Since its inception, Ian Peter has been the chair of the CSCG and I have been the Best Bits representative. But Ian is stepping down, and I am also willing to step down, so I would like to invite you to consider any suggestions for replacements. The positions are not very demanding in terms of time, but they can sometimes require you to respond quickly when a nomination opportunity comes up on short notice. The chair should be someone who is well organised, can act in a neutral manner, and has a track record of involvement with the Internet governance community. The Best Bits representative should also be someone who is well connected with the community and whose particular responsibility will be to liaise with our list about the opportunities that come up, and to relay and explain our suggestions to the rest of the CSCG. If anyone is interested in either of these positions, or would like to nominate someone else who may be interested, please let me know. -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From mshears at cdt.org Sat Nov 14 16:23:37 2015 From: mshears at cdt.org (Matthew Shears) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 20:23:37 -0100 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <564742E1.6090708@wzb.eu> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <564742E1.6090708@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <5647A659.5000800@cdt.org> Hi Jeanette The import of the statement is both in the messages, which are necessarily high level, and in the broad set of cross-stakeholder signatories, which reinforces the messages considerably. As it says everyone should put in their own messages as well. Best. Matthew On 14/11/2015 13:19, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > I don't understand why this statement focuses so much on > organizations. I also found it a bit wishi washi. > > Best, Jeanette > > Am 14.11.15 um 15:15 schrieb Mishi Choudhary: >> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >> >> >> >> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Lea Kaspar >> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >> To: Best Bits , wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >> Cc: Constance Bommelaer , york at isoc.org >> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >> statement >> >> Dear friends, >> >> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >> Brazil! >> >> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have led >> on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed back >> to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement is *to >> reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude additional >> independent or joint interventions/comments. >> >> The statement has already received broad support from the technical and >> the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like to >> endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer > >). >> >> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited via >> the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >> space. >> >> Best wishes, >> Lea >> >> --- >> >> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >> >> * Internet Democracy Project, India >> * Global Partners Digital, UK >> * Public Knowledge, US >> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >> * Horizontal, Mexico >> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >> * CIPESA, Uganda >> >> --- >> >> *Lea Kaspar* >> >> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >> >> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >> >> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >> >> gp-digital.org >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- Matthew Shears Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights Center for Democracy & Technology mshears at cdt.org + 44 771 247 2987 --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Sat Nov 14 20:14:48 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 23:14:48 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> Message-ID: Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been passed on to Constance. The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for further organisational and individual endorsements: https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ Feel free to circulate widely. Best, Lea Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary wrote: > > SFLC.in endorses it as well. > > > > Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Lea Kaspar > Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) > To: Best Bits , wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net > Cc: Constance Bommelaer , york at isoc.org > Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement > > Dear friends, > > For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in Brazil! > > Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have led on an effort to draft a short 1-page statement with key priorities shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement is to reinforce our common messages - it does not preclude additional independent or joint interventions/comments. > > The statement has already received broad support from the technical and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see below). It is now open for additional organisational endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil). If you would like to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know by 6PM today and share your organisational logo copying in Constance from ISOC (Constance Bommelaer ). > > Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this space. > > Best wishes, > Lea > > --- > > Organisational CS endorsements so far: > Internet Democracy Project, India > Global Partners Digital, UK > Public Knowledge, US > ICT Watch, Indonesia > Bytes for All, Pakistan > Horizontal, Mexico > Law Life Culture, Bangladesh > Center for Democracy & Technology, US > CIPESA, Uganda > --- > Lea Kaspar > Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT > T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspar > gp-digital.org > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeanette at wzb.eu Sat Nov 14 20:17:31 2015 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 02:17:31 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> Message-ID: <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to organizations? jeanette Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: > Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been passed > on to Constance. > > The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for > further organisational and individual endorsements: > https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ > > Feel free to circulate widely. > > Best, > Lea > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary > wrote: > >> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >> >> >> >> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >> >> >> -------- Original message -------- >> From: Lea Kaspar > >> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >> To: Best Bits > >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >> >> Cc: Constance Bommelaer > >, york at isoc.org >> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >> statement >> >> Dear friends, >> >> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >> Brazil! >> >> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >> >> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer > >). >> >> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >> space. >> >> Best wishes, >> Lea >> >> --- >> >> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >> >> * Internet Democracy Project, India >> * Global Partners Digital, UK >> * Public Knowledge, US >> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >> * Horizontal, Mexico >> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >> * CIPESA, Uganda >> >> --- >> >> *Lea Kaspar* >> >> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >> >> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >> >> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >> >> gp-digital.org >> >> >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > From lea at gp-digital.org Sat Nov 14 20:24:55 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 23:24:55 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <5647A659.5000800@cdt.org> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <564742E1.6090708@wzb.eu> <5647A659.5000800@cdt.org> Message-ID: <49702E4C-F62A-4C31-B2FE-9C9358C1D692@gp-digital.org> Hi Jeanette - Matt is right - the intention is to reinforce common messages across stakeholder groups. The closed negotiations (line by line) are taking place at UNGA next week and we were told that widely supported bottom/red line messages were the most likely to get traction. Here's hoping... Lea Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Nov 2015, at 19:23, Matthew Shears wrote: > > Hi Jeanette > > The import of the statement is both in the messages, which are necessarily high level, and in the broad set of cross-stakeholder signatories, which reinforces the messages considerably. > > As it says everyone should put in their own messages as well. > > Best. > > Matthew > >> On 14/11/2015 13:19, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> I don't understand why this statement focuses so much on organizations. I also found it a bit wishi washi. >> >> Best, Jeanette >> >>> Am 14.11.15 um 15:15 schrieb Mishi Choudhary: >>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Lea Kaspar >>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>> To: Best Bits , wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer , york at isoc.org >>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>> statement >>> >>> Dear friends, >>> >>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in Brazil! >>> >>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have led >>> on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed back >>> to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement is *to >>> reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude additional >>> independent or joint interventions/comments. >>> >>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical and >>> the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like to >>> endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >). >>> >>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited via >>> the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this space. >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> Lea >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>> >>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>> * Public Knowledge, US >>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>> >>> --- >>> >>> *Lea Kaspar* >>> >>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> >>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>> >>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>> >>> gp-digital.org >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > -- > > Matthew Shears > Director - Global Internet Policy and Human Rights > Center for Democracy & Technology > mshears at cdt.org > + 44 771 247 2987 > > > > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Sat Nov 14 20:30:59 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 23:30:59 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs and individuals in the preamble. Lea Sent from my iPhone > On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > > Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to organizations? > jeanette > > > >> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been passed >> on to Constance. >> >> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >> further organisational and individual endorsements: >> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >> >> Feel free to circulate widely. >> >> Best, >> Lea >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary > > wrote: >> >>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>> >>> >>> -------- Original message -------- >>> From: Lea Kaspar > >>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>> To: Best Bits >> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>> >>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >> >, york at isoc.org >>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>> statement >>> >>> Dear friends, >>> >>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>> Brazil! >>> >>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>> >>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >> >). >>> >>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >>> space. >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> Lea >>> >>> --- >>> >>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>> >>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>> * Public Knowledge, US >>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>> >>> --- >>> >>> *Lea Kaspar* >>> >>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>> >>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>> >>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>> >>> gp-digital.org >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca Sun Nov 15 08:02:14 2015 From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 08:02:14 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Civil Society Coordination Group - chair and BB representative positions open In-Reply-To: <56479534.8000609@eff.org> References: <56479534.8000609@eff.org> Message-ID: Thanks to Jeremy and the GP team for coordinating/supporting the meeting, and looking forward to whatever summary report follows. Cheers, Becky -----Original Message----- From: on behalf of Jeremy Malcolm Reply-To: Jeremy Malcolm Date: Saturday, November 14, 2015 at 3:10 PM To: bestbits Subject: [bestbits] Civil Society Coordination Group - chair and BB representative positions open >Thanks to those who came to the Best Bits meeting last week. With all >of the ensuing activity at the IGF, we have not yet managed to put >together a report of the meeting, but this will be sent soon (along with >some photos of the event). > >However there is one item that had been on the agenda for the final >session of the day that I neglected to bring up, and this was about the >Civil Society Coordination Group, which is the small group of >representatives of civil society networks in the Internet governance >space that coordinates joint nomination of civil society representatives >for positions such as the IGF MAG. > >Since its inception, Ian Peter has been the chair of the CSCG and I have >been the Best Bits representative. But Ian is stepping down, and I am >also willing to step down, so I would like to invite you to consider any >suggestions for replacements. The positions are not very demanding in >terms of time, but they can sometimes require you to respond quickly >when a nomination opportunity comes up on short notice. > >The chair should be someone who is well organised, can act in a neutral >manner, and has a track record of involvement with the Internet >governance community. The Best Bits representative should also be >someone who is well connected with the community and whose particular >responsibility will be to liaise with our list about the opportunities >that come up, and to relay and explain our suggestions to the rest of >the CSCG. > >If anyone is interested in either of these positions, or would like to >nominate someone else who may be interested, please let me know. > >-- >Jeremy Malcolm >Senior Global Policy Analyst >Electronic Frontier Foundation >https://eff.org >jmalcolm at eff.org > From jeanette at wzb.eu Sun Nov 15 09:06:19 2015 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 15:06:19 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> Message-ID: <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> Hi Lea, pershaps I am slow on the uptake this week but how do these paragraphs include individuals or am I looking at an obsolete version? Representatives of (COMPLETE ORGANISATION NAMES) gathered at the 10th Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, and would like to convey the following three key messages to guide negotiations in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Summit 10-year review process (WSIS+10). These organizations would like to collectively highlight and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The organizations may continue to provide separate and more detailed input on other elements of the WSIS outcome document, and related processes that are equally important to their respective communities. Best, jeanette Am 15.11.15 um 02:30 schrieb Lea Kaspar: > Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs and individuals in the preamble. > > Lea > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> >> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to organizations? >> jeanette >> >> >> >>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been passed >>> on to Constance. >>> >>> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >>> further organisational and individual endorsements: >>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >>> >>> Feel free to circulate widely. >>> >>> Best, >>> Lea >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary >> > wrote: >>> >>>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>>> >>>> >>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>> From: Lea Kaspar > >>>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>>> To: Best Bits >>> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>>> >>>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >>> >, york at isoc.org >>>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>>> statement >>>> >>>> Dear friends, >>>> >>>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>>> Brazil! >>>> >>>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >>>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>>> >>>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >>> >). >>>> >>>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >>>> space. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Lea >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>>> >>>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>>> * Public Knowledge, US >>>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> *Lea Kaspar* >>>> >>>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>> >>>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>>> >>>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>>> >>>> gp-digital.org >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits From lea at gp-digital.org Sun Nov 15 09:19:06 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 14:19:06 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <561D8DD8-1890-4EC1-9EA5-7E4E2033404C@gp-digital.org> Hi Jeanette, indeed the version now online has been adapted to accommodate individual endorsements. See it here: https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/ For convenience, I paste the relevant paras here: "Representatives of the organizations below who gathered at the 10th Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, along with other organizations and individuals from around the world, would like to convey the following three key messages to contribute to negotiations in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Society 10-year review process (WSIS+10). These organizations and individuals would like to collectively highlight and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)..." Best,Lea Sent from my iPhone > On 15 Nov 2015, at 14:06, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > > Hi Lea, pershaps I am slow on the uptake this week but how do these paragraphs include individuals or am I looking at an obsolete version? > > Representatives of (COMPLETE ORGANISATION NAMES) gathered at the 10th Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, and would like to convey the following three key messages to guide negotiations in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Summit 10-year review process (WSIS+10). > > These organizations would like to collectively highlight and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The organizations may continue to provide separate and more detailed input on other elements of the WSIS outcome document, and related processes that are equally important to their respective communities. > > Best, jeanette > > >> Am 15.11.15 um 02:30 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >> Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs and individuals in the preamble. >> >> Lea >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >>> >>> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to organizations? >>> jeanette >>> >>> >>> >>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been passed >>>> on to Constance. >>>> >>>> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >>>> further organisational and individual endorsements: >>>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >>>> >>>> Feel free to circulate widely. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Lea >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>> From: Lea Kaspar > >>>>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>>>> To: Best Bits >>>> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>>>> >>>>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >>>> >, york at isoc.org >>>>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>>>> statement >>>>> >>>>> Dear friends, >>>>> >>>>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>>>> Brazil! >>>>> >>>>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>>>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>>>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>>>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >>>>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>>>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>>>> >>>>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>>>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>>>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>>>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>>>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>>>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>>>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >>>> >). >>>>> >>>>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>>>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >>>>> space. >>>>> >>>>> Best wishes, >>>>> Lea >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>>>> >>>>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>>>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>>>> * Public Knowledge, US >>>>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>>>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>>>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>>>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>>>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>>>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>>>> >>>>> --- >>>>> >>>>> *Lea Kaspar* >>>>> >>>>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>> >>>>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>>>> >>>>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>>>> >>>>> gp-digital.org >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rysiek at hackerspace.pl Tue Nov 3 23:02:28 2015 From: rysiek at hackerspace.pl (rysiek) Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 05:02:28 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] US Support for Multistakeholder Governance is Conditional on US Remaining in Control In-Reply-To: References: <56262147.7030507@cis-india.org> Message-ID: <3175463.NI3ThZhqQh@lapuntu> Dnia wtorek, 20 października 2015 16:45:51 Padmini pisze: > Adding to that, he also said that the issue of jurisdiction doesn't relate > to the physical presence of ICANN as much as the jurisdiction of dispute > resolution mechanisms, and to not focus on the former which is not as > relevant. > Basically, no move in jurisdiction will ever be supported. Seems to me we have to move the jurisdiction ourselves. DNS should become deprecated in favour of other, more decentralised mechanisms, if USA does not want to release control. New TLDs are a joke. -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 931 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: From jeanette at wzb.eu Sun Nov 15 09:34:35 2015 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 15:34:35 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <561D8DD8-1890-4EC1-9EA5-7E4E2033404C@gp-digital.org> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> <561D8DD8-1890-4EC1-9EA5-7E4E2033404C@gp-digital.org> Message-ID: <564897FB.9030903@wzb.eu> Ok, I am glad! I was really really unhappy with the earlier version. thanks, Jeanette Am 15.11.15 um 15:19 schrieb Lea Kaspar: > Hi Jeanette, indeed the version now online has been adapted to > accommodate individual endorsements. See it here: > https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/ > > For convenience, I paste the relevant paras here: > "Representatives of the organizations below who gathered at the 10th > Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, along with > other organizations and individuals from around the world, would like to > convey the following three key messages to contribute to negotiations in > the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Society 10-year > review process (WSIS+10). > > These organizations and individuals would like to collectively highlight > and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important > work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the > United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)..." > > Best,Lea > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 15 Nov 2015, at 14:06, Jeanette Hofmann > wrote: > >> Hi Lea, pershaps I am slow on the uptake this week but how do these >> paragraphs include individuals or am I looking at an obsolete version? >> >> Representatives of (COMPLETE ORGANISATION NAMES) gathered at the 10th >> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, and would >> like to convey the following three key messages to guide negotiations >> in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Summit >> 10-year review process (WSIS+10). >> >> These organizations would like to collectively highlight and support >> the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and >> the collective work to support and successfully implement the United >> Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The organizations may >> continue to provide separate and more detailed input on other elements >> of the WSIS outcome document, and related processes that are equally >> important to their respective communities. >> >> Best, jeanette >> >> >> Am 15.11.15 um 02:30 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>> Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs >>> and individuals in the preamble. >>> >>> Lea >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to >>>> organizations? >>>> jeanette >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>>> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been >>>>> passed >>>>> on to Constance. >>>>> >>>>> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >>>>> further organisational and individual endorsements: >>>>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >>>>> >>>>> Feel free to circulate widely. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Lea >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary >>>>> >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>> From: Lea Kaspar >>>>>> > >>>>>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>>>>> To: Best Bits >>>>> >>>>>> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >>>>> >>>>>> >, york at isoc.org >>>>>> >>>>>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>>>>> statement >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear friends, >>>>>> >>>>>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>>>>> Brazil! >>>>>> >>>>>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>>>>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>>>>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>>>>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >>>>>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>>>>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>>>>> >>>>>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>>>>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>>>>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>>>>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>>>>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>>>>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>>>>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >>>>> >>>>>> >). >>>>>> >>>>>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>>>>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >>>>>> space. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>> Lea >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>>>>> >>>>>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>>>>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>>>>> * Public Knowledge, US >>>>>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>>>>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>>>>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>>>>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>>>>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>>>>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> *Lea Kaspar* >>>>>> >>>>>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>> >>>>>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>>>>> >>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>>>>> >>>>>> gp-digital.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > From pdmnbaruah at gmail.com Mon Nov 16 07:01:15 2015 From: pdmnbaruah at gmail.com (Padmini) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 17:31:15 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Do we need a unified post-transition IANA? Message-ID: Dear all, (Apologies for cross posting at the outset) At the Centre for Internet and Society, we found ourselves wondering why there was a strong presumption in favour of unified IANA functions after the transition, given that there was at one point of time significant amounts of discourse on splitting these functions. Even as we all debate over the extent of ICANN's coordinating functions over the different functions, perhaps we could open our - minds to the idea of separating the three functions - names, numbers, protocols - after the transition. This idea has been detailed in the blog post below. The three main points we make are : - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for technical specialisation leading to greater efficiency of the IANA functions. - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for more direct accountability, and no concentration of power. - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for ease of shifting of the {names,number,protocol parameters} IANA functions operator without affecting the legal structure of any of the other IANA function operators. http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/do-we-need-a-unified-post-tranistion-iana We welcome comments on this. Warm Regards Padmini Centre for Internet and Society Bangalore -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pouzin at well.com Mon Nov 16 08:13:10 2015 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 14:13:10 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] Do we need a unified post-transition IANA? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi , It was obvious from its inception that playing with IANA functions is nothing but a pastime tabled till the next US gov is firmly in the driver seat, maybe end 2017, as they have more critical priorities than IG. The crux of the matter is splitting ICANN functions. Not to be a public debate, of course. . Fasten your seat belts. Louis - - - On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Padmini wrote: > Dear all, > > (Apologies for cross posting at the outset) > > At the Centre for Internet and Society, we found ourselves wondering why > there was a strong presumption in favour of unified IANA functions after > the transition, given that there was at one point of time significant > amounts of discourse on splitting these functions. Even as we all debate > over the extent of ICANN's coordinating functions over the different > functions, perhaps we could open our - minds to the idea of separating the > three functions - names, numbers, protocols - after the transition. > > This idea has been detailed in the blog post below. The three main points > we make are : > > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for technical specialisation > leading to greater efficiency of the IANA functions. > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for more direct > accountability, and no concentration of power. > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for ease of shifting of the > {names,number,protocol parameters} IANA functions operator without > affecting the legal structure of any of the other IANA function operators. > > > > http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/do-we-need-a-unified-post-tranistion-iana > > > We welcome comments on this. > > Warm Regards > > Padmini > Centre for Internet and Society > Bangalore > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Mon Nov 16 09:14:56 2015 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Mwendwa Kivuva) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 17:14:56 +0300 Subject: [bestbits] Do we need a unified post-transition IANA? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Splitting of the IANA functions is not an impossibility, and the different communities had deliberated on them exhaustively. For example, the numbering community said they were comfortable on how the current IANA functions operator had performed it's role on the numbering function, and they were happy for ICANN to continue in that role. However, they also had clauses on what happens when the IANA functions operator fails to meet the SLA, and the community feels the function has to be moved to another operator. Regards On Nov 16, 2015 3:01 PM, "Padmini" wrote: > Dear all, > > (Apologies for cross posting at the outset) > > At the Centre for Internet and Society, we found ourselves wondering why > there was a strong presumption in favour of unified IANA functions after > the transition, given that there was at one point of time significant > amounts of discourse on splitting these functions. Even as we all debate > over the extent of ICANN's coordinating functions over the different > functions, perhaps we could open our - minds to the idea of separating the > three functions - names, numbers, protocols - after the transition. > > This idea has been detailed in the blog post below. The three main points > we make are : > > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for technical specialisation > leading to greater efficiency of the IANA functions. > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for more direct > accountability, and no concentration of power. > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for ease of shifting of the > {names,number,protocol parameters} IANA functions operator without > affecting the legal structure of any of the other IANA function operators. > > > > http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/do-we-need-a-unified-post-tranistion-iana > > > We welcome comments on this. > > Warm Regards > > Padmini > Centre for Internet and Society > Bangalore > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Mon Nov 16 11:59:43 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 11:59:43 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] US telco priorities Message-ID: http://www.cablefax.com/regulation/fcc-chairman-wheelers-top-7-priorities -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Mon Nov 16 13:26:34 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:26:34 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: You are invited to a public workshop on the Digital Single Market, December 3rd In-Reply-To: <1122833031102.1109427194119.1741286570.0.371322JL.1002@scheduler.constantcontact.com> References: <1122833031102.1109427194119.1741286570.0.371322JL.1002@scheduler.constantcontact.com> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *European Union Delegation to the US* Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 Subject: You are invited to a public workshop on the Digital Single Market, December 3rd To: carolina.rossini at gmail.com Having trouble viewing this email? Click here On May 6, the European Commission adopted its Digital Single Market strategy , with the aim to tear down regulatory walls and move from 28 national markets to a single one. As part of the strategy, the European Commission is conducting a series of consultations open to all stakeholders. You are invited to a public workshop, which will take place on December 3 at the Delegation of the European Union to the U.S ., to provide your views and comment on the consultation on "Online platforms, cloud & data, liability of intermediaries, collaborative economy ". * On May 6, the European Commission adopted its Digital Single Market strategy , with the aim to tear down regulatory walls and move from 28 national markets to a single one. The DSM strategy includes 16 targeted regulatory and non-regulatory actions, from privacy to cyber-security, from ICT standardization to the collaborative economy. In line with the "Better Regulation" principles, the European Commission is conducting a series of consultations , which are open to all stakeholders and can be completed on-line. The Commission is also organizing a series of workshops in Europe, to engage actively with all stakeholders across the board. The transatlantic link is a key dimension of the Digital Single Market strategy. The EU and the U.S. are already the largest trading bloc in the world, and all across the digital environment they have far more in common in terms of values, goals and challenges than either of them has with the rest of the world. It is of the utmost importance that policies impacting the digital economy, both in the EU and the U.S., are based on a mutual dialogue to ensure interoperability, promote business opportunities and safeguard the rights of citizens and consumers. For this reason the EU Delegation in Washington, DC decided to host a public workshop to have a public debate and gather the views of U.S. stakeholders on one key element of the DSM strategy, which has proven to be of particular interest in the U.S.: the consultation on "Online platforms, cloud & data, liability of intermediaries, collaborative economy " (see the background paper for more details). The workshop will take place on December 3, at the Delegation of the EU to the U.S. (2175 K Street NW), from 9:30am to 1:00pm. It will focus on interventions by participants rather than on panel discussions. The full agenda will follow, but in the meantime please register as space is limited and seats will be assigned on a "first come, first served" basis. For further details, please contact Ms Jesse Spector at Jesse.Spector at eeas.europa.eu . * Forward this email This email was sent to carolina.rossini at gmail.com by info at euintheus.org | Update Profile/Email Address | Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe ™ | About our service provider . European Union Delegation to the US | 2175 K Street NW | Washington | DC | 20037 -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seun.ojedeji at gmail.com Mon Nov 16 13:55:17 2015 From: seun.ojedeji at gmail.com (Seun Ojedeji) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 19:55:17 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] [CCWG-ACCT] Do we need a unified post-transition IANA? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, While it's fine to move this to appropriate list. It may be helpful to indicate that 3 lists are involved in this so it may be good to discuss the issue with the individual OCs. That said, I am certain the ship has sailed on this particular question in that ICG has completed its process (well almost) in producing a single proposal where each OCs have proposed a clear separation process post-transition and can indeed implement whenever required. Regards Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 Kindly excuse brevity and typos. On 16 Nov 2015 19:39, "León Felipe Sánchez Ambía" wrote: > Thanks Andrew, James and Milton, > > I suggest moving this discussion to the appropriate list. > > Best regards, > > > León > > El 16/11/2015, a las 10:59 a.m., Mueller, Milton L > escribió: > > This issue (separate or integrated IANA functions operators) is really an > issue that CCWG has nothing to say about. It was already decided by the > three operational communities that each IFO would be separable, and > protocols and numbers already have clear ways of separating from ICANN, > whereas names has a very difficult and complicated process for doing so. > > CCWG touches on this issue ONLY insofar as the instructions of the > separation process must be enforceable somehow (for ONLY the names > community). > > *From:* accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [ > mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org > ] *On Behalf Of *Padmini > *Sent:* Monday, November 16, 2015 7:01 AM > *To:* BestBits; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Accountability Cross > Community; NCSG-DISCUSS at listserv.syr.edu > *Subject:* [CCWG-ACCT] Do we need a unified post-transition IANA? > > > Dear all, > > (Apologies for cross posting at the outset) > > At the Centre for Internet and Society, we found ourselves wondering why > there was a strong presumption in favour of unified IANA functions after > the transition, given that there was at one point of time significant > amounts of discourse on splitting these functions. Even as we all debate > over the extent of ICANN's coordinating functions over the different > functions, perhaps we could open our - minds to the idea of separating the > three functions - names, numbers, protocols - after the transition. > This idea has been detailed in the blog post below. The three main points > we make are : > > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for technical specialisation > leading to greater efficiency of the IANA functions. > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for more direct > accountability, and no concentration of power. > - Splitting of the IANA functions allows for ease of shifting of the > {names,number,protocol parameters} IANA functions operator without > affecting the legal structure of any of the other IANA function operators. > > > > > http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/do-we-need-a-unified-post-tranistion-iana > > We welcome comments on this. > > Warm Regards > Padmini > Centre for Internet and Society > Bangalore > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > > > _______________________________________________ > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list > Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gpaque at gmail.com Mon Nov 16 15:14:50 2015 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 14:14:50 -0600 Subject: [bestbits] IGF Summary report by GIP Digital Watch Message-ID: Dear friends and colleagues, The IGF Summary Report is out! With a time-distance of only 2 weekend days, the Report should help you put numerous discussions in a broader context. The IGF Report provides layered reporting from a general overview, which you are reading now, to detailed summaries which you can follow via links on GIP Digital Watch and, on the third layer, primary source materials including session transcripts, tweets, and data sources. In this way GIP Digital Watch , in partnership with the Internet Society and DiploFoundation contributes to evidence-based policy making and future developments of the IGF. As always, your comments and support for our efforts will be welcome. With best regards, Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque DiploFoundation *DiploFoundation upcoming online courses:* http://www.diplomacy.edu/courses* * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca Mon Nov 16 17:40:47 2015 From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 17:40:47 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] FW: [IJoC] New Special Section on "Latin American Struggles" Published In-Reply-To: <201511162214.tAGMEVYS010692@web.uscwp.com> References: <201511162214.tAGMEVYS010692@web.uscwp.com> Message-ID: This might be of interest to some on this list... -----Original Message----- From: Arlene Luck Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 5:14 PM To: Becky Lentz Subject: [IJoC] New Special Section on "Latin American Struggles" Published >Dear Readers, > >While much attention has been paid to digital communication within the >Occupy Wall Street movement and the Arab Spring uprisings, its role within >contemporary struggles and protest movements in Latin America has not >received the consideration it deserves, especially internationally in >English-language scholarship. The academic literature on this topic is >fragmented, and it is hard to find a coherent set of articles that explore >the appropriations of digital media for resistance within the Latin >American >scenario. > >In this Special Section on Latin American Struggles and Digital Media >Resistance, we provide a space where various scholars reflect upon the >contributions, the challenges, and the confrontations that digital >technologies and alternative media pose to contemporary social movements >and >collectives in several Latin American countries. > >Guest-edited by Emiliano Treré and Claudia Magallanes-Blanco, this Special >Section features seven original articles and two extended conversations >with >leading experts in the field who address the complexities in the >appropriations of digital technologies for resistance in Latin America. >Based on empirical research, the contributions of this Special Section >examine the challenges that digital resistance has to face in highly >concentrated media ecologies. > >This collection of work also analyzes how new technologies reconfigure >political participation, redefine the role of alternative media, and >propose >new conceptual lenses in order to understand contemporary activism in >Latin >America. Moreover, the articles in this Special Section contribute to the >international debate about the changing dynamics of social movements and >media in Latin America, and about their interconnections with the >uprisings >in the Mediterranean region, and in the Global South. > >Authors for this Special Section include: > >Lazaro Bacallao-Pino, University of Chile, Chile >Diana Coryat, Universidad de las Américas, Ecuador >Bernardo Gutíerrez, founder of futuramedia.net and codigo-abierto.cc >Summer Harlow, Florida State University, U.S. >Alexander Hernández, Universidad del Zulia, Venezuela >Jairo Lugo-Ocando, University of Leeds, UK >Monica Marchesi, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain >Rodrigo Nunes, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil >Daniela Parra, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico >Patricia Peña, Universidad de Chile, Chile >Geoffrey Pleyers, Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium >Raul Rodriguez, Universidad de Chile, Chile >Chiara Sáez, Universidad de Chile, Chile >Emiliano Treré, Autonomous University of Querétaro, Mexico & Lakehead >University, Canada > >We invite you to read this new Special Section that published November 16, >2015 at http://ijoc.org. > >Larry Gross >Editor > >Arlene Luck >Managing Editor >___________________________________________________ >International Journal of Communication (IJoC) >USC Annenberg Press >University of Southern California >http://ijoc.org/ From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 10:01:49 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:01:49 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: New discussion post In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: WSIS Knowledge Communities Date: Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 8:50 AM Subject: New discussion post To: carolina.rossini at gmail.com New post by FJDD for the discussion "Search of Promotors Partners - COP22 - Sustainable Campus International Competition" via Open Educational Resources (OER) The Youth for Sustainable Development Foundation (YSDF) will launch in January 2016, under the honorary Presidency of the Moroccan Delegate Minister of Environment, Ms. Hakima El Haite, the 4th edition of the Sustainable Campus International Competition. Many studies, conferences and symposiums were conducted on water issues. Today, a lot of data are available but only few solutions are either available or promoted yet in order to reduce human pressure on water resources. The YSDF and all its partners, want improve the situation by organising a special edition of its Sustainable Campus International Competition dedicated to water management. This special edition targets primarily engineering schools and invites future engineers to participate in the development of new technologies aiming to treat, save, reuse or capture water in order to have a more sustainable and fair water management. Projects submissions will be opened from January to October 2016 and then in November 2016, an international experts panel will evaluate the submitted projects. Finally, in December 2016, an exhibition presenting the best projects from the various engineering schools will be organized in parallel with the COP22 organized in Morocco. In addition to young innovators, companies offering technological solutions will also get a booth showcasing their products and services. Moreover, major decision makers will attend this COP22 in Morocco and be able to discover new water management solutions for their countries and to meet young innovators, providing a lot of opportunities for all participants. Therefore, this letter offers you the great opportunity to become one of our partners and also provides you the necessary information to promote this competition across your network. Promotional material and a dedicated website will be available by the end of this year. The official launch of the competition will take place in early January 2016. If you are interested in supporting this competitionor having questions, please let us know by writing an email to the following address: s.racine at fjdd.org http://www.wsis-community.org/pg/forum/topic/5111638/search-of-promotors-partners-cop22-sustainable-campus-international-competition/ -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 09:50:05 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 09:50:05 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] TODAY - US Cybersecurity Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Melanie Penagos Date: Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 9:48 AM FYI, the Council on Foreign Relations is hosting a Cybersecurity Symposium today. They are live streaming the following panels (which focus on the state of cybersecurity in the U.S. and around the world). November 4, 2015 A Conversation With Jeh Charles Johnson Jeh Charles Johnson discusses the state of U.S. cybersecurity. Speakers: Jeh Charles Johnson Secretary, U.S. Department of Homeland Security Andrea Mitchell Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, NBC News November 4, 2015 Cybersecurity Elsewhere Experts discuss cybersecurity around the world. Speakers: Preetam Maloor Strategy and Policy Advisor, Corporate Strategy Division, International Telecommunication Union Iddo Moed Cybersecurity Coordinator, Foreign Ministry of Israel Makita Shimokawa Deputy Director General, Foreign Policy Bureau and Ambassador in Charge of UN Affairs, Ambassador in Charge of Cyber Policy, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government of Japan Diego Molano Vega Former Minister, Information Technologies and Communication, Government of Colombia Presider: Jessica T. Mathews Distinguished Fellow, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace November 4, 2015 Cyber Offense and Rules of the Road Experts discuss the laws and norms surrounding cyber issues. Speakers: Scott Charney Corporate Vice President of Trustworthy Computing, Microsoft Christopher Painter Coordinator for Cyber Issues, U.S. Department of State Eneken Tikk-Ringas Senior Fellow for Cybersecurity, International Institute for Strategic Studies Presider: Craig Mundie President, Mundie & Associates November 4, 2015 The State of U.S. Cybersecurity Experts assess the state of U.S. cybersecurity. Speakers: Michael Daniel Special Assistant to the President and Cybersecurity Coordinator, White House Michael McCaul Chairman, U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Homeland Security Raj Shah Senior Director of Strategy, Palo Alto Networks Presider: Stewart A. Baker Partner, Steptoe & Johnson LLP Introductory Speaker: Richard N. Haass President, Council on Foreign Relations -- *Melanie Penagos* *International Policy Associate* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * +1 (202) 861-0020 ext. 122 | skype: melanie.penagos | @ampenagos -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 14:37:14 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 14:37:14 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <564897FB.9030903@wzb.eu> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> <561D8DD8-1890-4EC1-9EA5-7E4E2033404C@gp-digital.org> <564897FB.9030903@wzb.eu> Message-ID: There is a follow up meeting with State Department tomorrow. I would be happy to deliver a copy of this statement. Do you think would help? On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > Ok, I am glad! I was really really unhappy with the earlier version. > thanks, Jeanette > > Am 15.11.15 um 15:19 schrieb Lea Kaspar: > >> Hi Jeanette, indeed the version now online has been adapted to >> accommodate individual endorsements. See it here: >> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/ >> >> For convenience, I paste the relevant paras here: >> "Representatives of the organizations below who gathered at the 10th >> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, along with >> other organizations and individuals from around the world, would like to >> convey the following three key messages to contribute to negotiations in >> the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Society 10-year >> review process (WSIS+10). >> >> These organizations and individuals would like to collectively highlight >> and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important >> work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the >> United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)..." >> >> Best,Lea >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 15 Nov 2015, at 14:06, Jeanette Hofmann > > wrote: >> >> Hi Lea, pershaps I am slow on the uptake this week but how do these >>> paragraphs include individuals or am I looking at an obsolete version? >>> >>> Representatives of (COMPLETE ORGANISATION NAMES) gathered at the 10th >>> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, and would >>> like to convey the following three key messages to guide negotiations >>> in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Summit >>> 10-year review process (WSIS+10). >>> >>> These organizations would like to collectively highlight and support >>> the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and >>> the collective work to support and successfully implement the United >>> Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The organizations may >>> continue to provide separate and more detailed input on other elements >>> of the WSIS outcome document, and related processes that are equally >>> important to their respective communities. >>> >>> Best, jeanette >>> >>> >>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:30 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>> >>>> Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs >>>> and individuals in the preamble. >>>> >>>> Lea >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann >>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to >>>>> organizations? >>>>> jeanette >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>>>> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been >>>>>> passed >>>>>> on to Constance. >>>>>> >>>>>> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >>>>>> further organisational and individual endorsements: >>>>>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Feel free to circulate widely. >>>>>> >>>>>> Best, >>>>>> Lea >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary >>>>>> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>> From: Lea Kaspar >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>>>>>> To: Best Bits >>>>>> >>>>>>> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >>>>>> >>>>>>> >, york at isoc.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>>>>>> statement >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dear friends, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>>>>>> Brazil! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>>>>>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>>>>>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>>>>>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the >>>>>>> statement >>>>>>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>>>>>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>>>>>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues >>>>>>> (see >>>>>>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>>>>>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>>>>>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>>>>>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>>>>>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >>>>>> >>>>>>> >). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>>>>>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch >>>>>>> this >>>>>>> space. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>>> Lea >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>>>>>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>>>>>> * Public Knowledge, US >>>>>>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>>>>>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>>>>>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>>>>>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>>>>>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>>>>>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Lea Kaspar* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>>>>>> >>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>>>>>> >>>>>>> gp-digital.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>> >>>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Tue Nov 17 15:30:36 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 20:30:36 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> <561D8DD8-1890-4EC1-9EA5-7E4E2033404C@gp-digital.org> <564897FB.9030903@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <29D7B2CA-0933-40DF-A963-7F1BC35763D6@gp-digital.org> Hi, That would be great, Carol. I'm not sure if ISOC were planning any form of formal submission, but tomorrow is perfect timing to share with governments - the negotiations start on Thursday. I'll also drop a line to Constance to check if this could be formally submitted to the process. Best, Lea Sent from my iPhone > On 17 Nov 2015, at 19:37, Carolina Rossini wrote: > > There is a follow up meeting with State Department tomorrow. I would be happy to deliver a copy of this statement. Do you think would help? > >> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> Ok, I am glad! I was really really unhappy with the earlier version. >> thanks, Jeanette >> >>> Am 15.11.15 um 15:19 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>> Hi Jeanette, indeed the version now online has been adapted to >>> accommodate individual endorsements. See it here: >>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/ >>> >>> For convenience, I paste the relevant paras here: >>> "Representatives of the organizations below who gathered at the 10th >>> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, along with >>> other organizations and individuals from around the world, would like to >>> convey the following three key messages to contribute to negotiations in >>> the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Society 10-year >>> review process (WSIS+10). >>> >>> These organizations and individuals would like to collectively highlight >>> and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important >>> work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the >>> United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)..." >>> >>> Best,Lea >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 15 Nov 2015, at 14:06, Jeanette Hofmann >> > wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Lea, pershaps I am slow on the uptake this week but how do these >>>> paragraphs include individuals or am I looking at an obsolete version? >>>> >>>> Representatives of (COMPLETE ORGANISATION NAMES) gathered at the 10th >>>> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, and would >>>> like to convey the following three key messages to guide negotiations >>>> in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Summit >>>> 10-year review process (WSIS+10). >>>> >>>> These organizations would like to collectively highlight and support >>>> the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and >>>> the collective work to support and successfully implement the United >>>> Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The organizations may >>>> continue to provide separate and more detailed input on other elements >>>> of the WSIS outcome document, and related processes that are equally >>>> important to their respective communities. >>>> >>>> Best, jeanette >>>> >>>> >>>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:30 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>>> Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs >>>>> and individuals in the preamble. >>>>> >>>>> Lea >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann >>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to >>>>>> organizations? >>>>>> jeanette >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>>>>> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been >>>>>>> passed >>>>>>> on to Constance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >>>>>>> further organisational and individual endorsements: >>>>>>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Feel free to circulate widely. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> Lea >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>> From: Lea Kaspar >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>>>>>>> To: Best Bits >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >, york at isoc.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>>>>>>> statement >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear friends, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>>>>>>> Brazil! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>>>>>>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>>>>>>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>>>>>>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >>>>>>>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>>>>>>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>>>>>>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>>>>>>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>>>>>>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>>>>>>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>>>>>>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>>>>>>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>>>>>>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >>>>>>>> space. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>>>> Lea >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>>>>>>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>>>>>>> * Public Knowledge, US >>>>>>>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>>>>>>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>>>>>>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>>>>>>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>>>>>>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>>>>>>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Lea Kaspar* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> gp-digital.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > > Carolina Rossini > Vice President, International Policy > Public Knowledge > http://www.publicknowledge.org/ > + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wisdom.dk at gmail.com Tue Nov 17 16:09:49 2015 From: wisdom.dk at gmail.com (Wisdom Donkor) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 21:09:49 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> <5647DD2B.1030300@wzb.eu> <4B7FEAA4-8E1E-4A3F-97AB-A6F9FB021824@gp-digital.org> <5648915B.6060805@wzb.eu> <561D8DD8-1890-4EC1-9EA5-7E4E2033404C@gp-digital.org> <564897FB.9030903@wzb.eu> Message-ID: Thanks for the information On Tuesday, November 17, 2015, Carolina Rossini wrote: > There is a follow up meeting with State Department tomorrow. I would be happy to deliver a copy of this statement. Do you think would help? > On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: >> >> Ok, I am glad! I was really really unhappy with the earlier version. >> thanks, Jeanette >> >> Am 15.11.15 um 15:19 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>> >>> Hi Jeanette, indeed the version now online has been adapted to >>> accommodate individual endorsements. See it here: >>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/ >>> >>> For convenience, I paste the relevant paras here: >>> "Representatives of the organizations below who gathered at the 10th >>> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, along with >>> other organizations and individuals from around the world, would like to >>> convey the following three key messages to contribute to negotiations in >>> the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Society 10-year >>> review process (WSIS+10). >>> >>> These organizations and individuals would like to collectively highlight >>> and support the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important >>> work, and the collective work to support and successfully implement the >>> United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)..." >>> >>> Best,Lea >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 15 Nov 2015, at 14:06, Jeanette Hofmann >> > wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Lea, pershaps I am slow on the uptake this week but how do these >>>> paragraphs include individuals or am I looking at an obsolete version? >>>> >>>> Representatives of (COMPLETE ORGANISATION NAMES) gathered at the 10th >>>> Internet Governance Forum (IGF), in João Pessoa, Brazil, and would >>>> like to convey the following three key messages to guide negotiations >>>> in the final phase of the World Summit on the Information Summit >>>> 10-year review process (WSIS+10). >>>> >>>> These organizations would like to collectively highlight and support >>>> the extension of the IGF’s mandate to continue its important work, and >>>> the collective work to support and successfully implement the United >>>> Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The organizations may >>>> continue to provide separate and more detailed input on other elements >>>> of the WSIS outcome document, and related processes that are equally >>>> important to their respective communities. >>>> >>>> Best, jeanette >>>> >>>> >>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:30 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Jeanette, not sure I follow - the statement refers to both orgs >>>>> and individuals in the preamble. >>>>> >>>>> Lea >>>>> >>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>> >>>>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 23:17, Jeanette Hofmann >>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Why would individuals sign a statement that exclusively refers to >>>>>> organizations? >>>>>> jeanette >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 15.11.15 um 02:14 schrieb Lea Kaspar: >>>>>>> Thanks, all, for the additional endorsements, which have now been >>>>>>> passed >>>>>>> on to Constance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The statement and the list of signatories is now live and open for >>>>>>> further organisational and individual endorsements: >>>>>>> https://www.openwsis2015.org/joint-statement-on-wsis10/signatories/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Feel free to circulate widely. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best, >>>>>>> Lea >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 Nov 2015, at 12:15, Mishi Choudhary >>>>>>> >>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> SFLC.in endorses it as well. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -------- Original message -------- >>>>>>>> From: Lea Kaspar >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) >>>>>>>> To: Best Bits >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >, wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cc: Constance Bommelaer >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >, york at isoc.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 >>>>>>>> statement >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dear friends, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in >>>>>>>> Brazil! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have >>>>>>>> led on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key >>>>>>>> priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed >>>>>>>> back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement >>>>>>>> is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude >>>>>>>> additional independent or joint interventions/comments. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The statement has already received broad support from the technical >>>>>>>> and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see >>>>>>>> below). It is *_now open for additional organisational >>>>>>>> endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like >>>>>>>> to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM >>>>>>>> today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from >>>>>>>> ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited >>>>>>>> via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this >>>>>>>> space. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>>>> Lea >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Organisational CS endorsements so far: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Internet Democracy Project, India >>>>>>>> * Global Partners Digital, UK >>>>>>>> * Public Knowledge, US >>>>>>>> * ICT Watch, Indonesia >>>>>>>> * Bytes for All, Pakistan >>>>>>>> * Horizontal, Mexico >>>>>>>> * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh >>>>>>>> * Center for Democracy & Technology, US >>>>>>>> * CIPESA, Uganda >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *Lea Kaspar* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> gp-digital.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > > Carolina Rossini > Vice President, International Policy > Public Knowledge > http://www.publicknowledge.org/ > + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini > -- WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.) ICANN Fellow / ISOC Member Web/OGPL Portal Specialist National Information Technology Agency (NITA) Ghana Open Data Initiative (GODI) Post Office Box CT. 2439, Cantonments, Accra, Ghana Tel; +233 20 812881 Email: wisdom_dk at hotmail.com wisdom.donkor at data.gov.gh wisdom.dk at gmail.com Skype: wisdom_dk facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk Website: www.nita.gov.gh / www.data.gov.gh www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 12:01:42 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:01:42 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] IGF Videos Available Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCk0zf4oI0IsJLh1owvUQSfQ -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonathan at gp-digital.org Wed Nov 18 12:03:23 2015 From: jonathan at gp-digital.org (Jonathan Jacobs) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 17:03:23 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] New article on Cybersecurity and Human Rights Message-ID: Hi all, Just to let everyone know that GPD's Executive Director Andrew Puddephatt and Head of Programmes Lea Kaspar have co-written an article for openDemocracy, titled *Cybersecurity is the new battleground for human rights. * In the article, Andrew and Lea argue that human rights defenders need to start engaging with cybersecurity, both as an urgent threat to our privacy and Internet freedom and as a potential site for broader debates on what a free, open and rights-focused Internet might look like. It also imagines what a new definition of cybersecurity, centered on the security and rights of the end user, rather than on systems, might look like: "It might mean a legal and normative shift in our conception of data ownership, putting ownership and control of personal information in the hands of the user, rather than the service provider. It might mean guaranteed end-to-end encryption and public education programs that focus upon personal privacy and data protection. It could mean instilling stronger accountability and oversight structures where data collection is deemed necessary, by ensuring that the scope of such powers is narrowly defined, and that oversight mechanisms include staff with high level computer skills, and judicial authorisation for any interference in people's’ privacy." Read the full article here. We'd be interested to hear any feedback on the article; and please share on your networks with anyone who might be interested. Best wishes, Jonathan -- *Jonathan Jacobs* Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT Skype: jonathan.gpdigital Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 gp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ellerygv at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 11:31:57 2015 From: ellerygv at gmail.com (Ellery Biddle) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 11:31:57 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Help support our colleagues facing trial in Morocco Message-ID: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> Dear Best Bits gang, This is a short but passionate appeal to you all to help support our colleagues going on trial tomorrow in Morocco for their work as human rights defenders and technology researchers. As many of you know, among those on trial will be my friend and colleague Hisham Almiraat, who many of you know. If you're able, please join Global Voices' statement of support and circulate among your networks. In Hisham's words, "the [the Moroccan authorities] think we're nobodies, they will crush us." This is to say that any support is much, much appreciated. Statement here: https://globalvoices.org/2015/11/18/global-voices-community-stands-with-moroccan-free-expression-advocates/ Tweets with ht #Justice4Morocco and #Justice4Hisham Thank you and be well, Ellery -- Ellery Roberts Biddle Global Voices, Advocacy Director @ellerybiddle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 906 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From deborah at apc.org Wed Nov 18 12:32:34 2015 From: deborah at apc.org (Deborah Brown) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 12:32:34 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Help support our colleagues facing trial in Morocco In-Reply-To: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> References: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <564CB632.1070809@apc.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Hi Ellery, Thanks very much for sharing this. Will distribute among the APC network. If there's any updates on his case, please do let us know. Deborah On 11/18/15 11:31 AM, Ellery Biddle wrote: > Dear Best Bits gang, > > This is a short but passionate appeal to you all to help support our > colleagues going on trial tomorrow in Morocco for their work as human > rights defenders and technology researchers. > > As many of you know, among those on trial will be my friend and > colleague Hisham Almiraat, who many of you know. > > If you're able, please join Global Voices' statement of support and > circulate among your networks. In Hisham's words, "the [the Moroccan > authorities] think we're nobodies, they will crush us." This is to say > that any support is much, much appreciated. > > Statement here: > https://globalvoices.org/2015/11/18/global-voices-community-stands-with-moroccan-free-expression-advocates/ > > Tweets with ht #Justice4Morocco and #Justice4Hisham > > Thank you and be well, > > Ellery > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits - -- Deborah Brown Senior Project Coordinator Association for Progressive Communications (APC) www.apc.org deborah at apc.org @deblebrown -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWTLYyAAoJEPeieloNaneNn8EP/0s/56g91nEMKKP2FzB9o0Z2 jLssgvysac1V7qQBK+MMI1yStIQcM4+96/AasHPNDP5+sLaj8UO/poEAXkYOXBWw qPP4PBrsvcSzkfNvqjd5TWpZlI7DPjqQJZlGRBqH3dgyVwn1AG5CgfdM54CjGiNr 9k8/4NyTJXIolZrGgKyHfmh/lSlo77YXoEQ/pxcpUqEqMnhmu7CVJTntigABqF8N CovyxCOf5UQeE8MQDQXZ8VyfBPmDykiGZORdQCNq+v0CMvw3ifLD/0O1EfLUdaxh pxDqQep8zDOWnMlVuBeFcQtRtFYR9xuCZim0jIXWLnWDNXWBf/8/D913EKawIyqU UMtIN/PSN6p+JkpJkn0M93ac3oAu2KRSDD9ynma7Ajg0yyNnjYwp7Zh7qGZzLAo9 20QtbPxq4hyS/Yw7hWBi++SwjIAewRlw4ZvIU0qCbveMpb7n/73/I0KVsMIhMl/U KVDFL67H6YbCNtz4ZFseGX1ws7qh08nhUvfOxrzvNEDQCgBIK8VndSx7ILtiZOzP 4HWyrccnABCIPIo+9EoKBNixqDrKbCOhZ4w5NAc/KOOHcFOKYESaau77nHs2sx1J Uw+fffB2bdZSc3fgKzOu0j4QejL4vCzWIMM1RSs/Hq4jP20vrMrFdbYFf51WwUdP HIDmOT/9owSUw2DpB+z8 =2cZM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rguerra at privaterra.org Wed Nov 18 13:25:44 2015 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 13:25:44 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Help support our colleagues facing trial in Morocco In-Reply-To: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> References: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <701FDBDC-ABCF-481C-876E-F974A8A93F55@privaterra.org> I hope people are aware that the spring 2016 ICANN meeting will be taking place in Marrakesh… https://meetings.icann.org/en/marrakech55 regards Robert -- Robert Guerra Phone: +1 416-893-0377 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org PGP Keys : https://keybase.io/rguerra On 18 Nov 2015, at 11:31, Ellery Biddle wrote: > Dear Best Bits gang, > > This is a short but passionate appeal to you all to help support our > colleagues going on trial tomorrow in Morocco for their work as human > rights defenders and technology researchers. > > As many of you know, among those on trial will be my friend and > colleague Hisham Almiraat, who many of you know. > > If you're able, please join Global Voices' statement of support and > circulate among your networks. In Hisham's words, "the [the Moroccan > authorities] think we're nobodies, they will crush us." This is to say > that any support is much, much appreciated. > > Statement here: > https://globalvoices.org/2015/11/18/global-voices-community-stands-with-moroccan-free-expression-advocates/ > > Tweets with ht #Justice4Morocco and #Justice4Hisham > > Thank you and be well, > > Ellery > > > -- > Ellery Roberts Biddle > Global Voices, Advocacy Director > @ellerybiddle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From anriette at apc.org Wed Nov 18 14:26:17 2015 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 21:26:17 +0200 Subject: [bestbits] Help support our colleagues facing trial in Morocco In-Reply-To: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> References: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <564CD0D9.9070503@apc.org> Dear Ellery Thanks.. we have supported too. Hisham is a really wonderful person who I got to know only in 2013 but who really impressed me from the outset. He is one of those grounded, wise activists without much ego, aware of and supportive of those around him. Others in APC have known him for longer and Leila has already circulated the call for support in the APC community. As APC we will do what we can to support him. Anriette On 18/11/2015 18:31, Ellery Biddle wrote: > Dear Best Bits gang, > > This is a short but passionate appeal to you all to help support our > colleagues going on trial tomorrow in Morocco for their work as human > rights defenders and technology researchers. > > As many of you know, among those on trial will be my friend and > colleague Hisham Almiraat, who many of you know. > > If you're able, please join Global Voices' statement of support and > circulate among your networks. In Hisham's words, "the [the Moroccan > authorities] think we're nobodies, they will crush us." This is to say > that any support is much, much appreciated. > > Statement here: > https://globalvoices.org/2015/11/18/global-voices-community-stands-with-moroccan-free-expression-advocates/ > > Tweets with ht #Justice4Morocco and #Justice4Hisham > > Thank you and be well, > > Ellery > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- ----------------------------------------- Anriette Esterhuysen Executive Director Association for Progressive Communications anriette at apc.org www.apc.org IM: ae_apc From mishi at softwarefreedom.org Wed Nov 18 16:24:20 2015 From: mishi at softwarefreedom.org (Mishi Choudhary) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:24:20 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Help support our colleagues facing trial in Morocco In-Reply-To: <564CD0D9.9070503@apc.org> References: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> <564CD0D9.9070503@apc.org> Message-ID: <564CEC84.4000002@softwarefreedom.org> SFLC.in has signed the petition. Is there anything else we can do? On 11/18/2015 02:26 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > Dear Ellery > > Thanks.. we have supported too. Hisham is a really wonderful person who > I got to know only in 2013 but who really impressed me from the outset. > He is one of those grounded, wise activists without much ego, aware of > and supportive of those around him. Others in APC have known him for > longer and Leila has already circulated the call for support in the APC > community. > > As APC we will do what we can to support him. > > Anriette > > > On 18/11/2015 18:31, Ellery Biddle wrote: >> Dear Best Bits gang, >> >> This is a short but passionate appeal to you all to help support our >> colleagues going on trial tomorrow in Morocco for their work as human >> rights defenders and technology researchers. >> >> As many of you know, among those on trial will be my friend and >> colleague Hisham Almiraat, who many of you know. >> >> If you're able, please join Global Voices' statement of support and >> circulate among your networks. In Hisham's words, "the [the Moroccan >> authorities] think we're nobodies, they will crush us." This is to say >> that any support is much, much appreciated. >> >> Statement here: >> https://globalvoices.org/2015/11/18/global-voices-community-stands-with-moroccan-free-expression-advocates/ >> >> Tweets with ht #Justice4Morocco and #Justice4Hisham >> >> Thank you and be well, >> >> Ellery >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Warm Regards Mishi Choudhary, Esq. Legal Director Software Freedom Law Center 1995 Broadway Floor 17 New York, NY-10023 (tel) 212-461-1912 (fax) 212-580-0898 www.softwarefreedom.org Executive Director SFLC.IN K-9, Second Floor Jangpura Extn. New Delhi-110014 (tel) +91-11-43587126 (fax) +91-11-24323530 www.sflc.in From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 10:26:57 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 10:26:57 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Video: Humanitarian UAViators Mission to Nepal In-Reply-To: <547392.966284231.1446650610721.JavaMail.xncore@z10107c.ningops.com> References: <547392.966284231.1446650610721.JavaMail.xncore@z10107c.ningops.com> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Humanitarian UAV Network Date: Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 10:23 AM Subject: Video: Humanitarian UAViators Mission to Nepal To: "carolina.rossini at gmail.com" Dear UAViators, DJI just launched this short film documentary on the UAViators mission that we spearheaded in Nepal a few weeks ago. We'd be grateful if you could share this video widely to help us raise awareness about the positive impact that aerial robotics can have in the humanitarian space. Feel free to follow our Twitter feed if you'd like to follow our future UAV missions live. In the meantime, big thanks to our outstanding local partners in Nepal (Kathmandu University and Kathmandu Living Labs) as well as our invaluable international technology partners (DJI & Pix4D) for making this humanitarian UAV mission possible. Please help us share this video widely in order to spread the world about the positive application of Aerial Robotics in the humanitarian space. Many thanks, Patrick Visit Humanitarian UAV Network at: http://uaviators.org/?xg_source=msg_mes_network To control which emails you receive on Humanitarian UAV Network, click here -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From raquino at gmail.com Wed Nov 18 17:15:13 2015 From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2015 19:15:13 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] Help support our colleagues facing trial in Morocco In-Reply-To: <564CEC84.4000002@softwarefreedom.org> References: <564CA7FD.5080606@gmail.com> <564CD0D9.9070503@apc.org> <564CEC84.4000002@softwarefreedom.org> Message-ID: Hi We've spread the word in Brazilian Portuguese in our internet governance interest group Hoping all ends well []s On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:24 PM, Mishi Choudhary wrote: > SFLC.in has signed the petition. Is there anything else we can do? > > On 11/18/2015 02:26 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote: > > Dear Ellery > > > > Thanks.. we have supported too. Hisham is a really wonderful person who > > I got to know only in 2013 but who really impressed me from the outset. > > He is one of those grounded, wise activists without much ego, aware of > > and supportive of those around him. Others in APC have known him for > > longer and Leila has already circulated the call for support in the APC > > community. > > > > As APC we will do what we can to support him. > > > > Anriette > > > > > > On 18/11/2015 18:31, Ellery Biddle wrote: > >> Dear Best Bits gang, > >> > >> This is a short but passionate appeal to you all to help support our > >> colleagues going on trial tomorrow in Morocco for their work as human > >> rights defenders and technology researchers. > >> > >> As many of you know, among those on trial will be my friend and > >> colleague Hisham Almiraat, who many of you know. > >> > >> If you're able, please join Global Voices' statement of support and > >> circulate among your networks. In Hisham's words, "the [the Moroccan > >> authorities] think we're nobodies, they will crush us." This is to say > >> that any support is much, much appreciated. > >> > >> Statement here: > >> > https://globalvoices.org/2015/11/18/global-voices-community-stands-with-moroccan-free-expression-advocates/ > >> > >> Tweets with ht #Justice4Morocco and #Justice4Hisham > >> > >> Thank you and be well, > >> > >> Ellery > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > >> > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > Warm Regards > Mishi Choudhary, Esq. > Legal Director > Software Freedom Law Center > 1995 Broadway Floor 17 > New York, NY-10023 > (tel) 212-461-1912 > (fax) 212-580-0898 > www.softwarefreedom.org > > > Executive Director > SFLC.IN > K-9, Second Floor > Jangpura Extn. > New Delhi-110014 > (tel) +91-11-43587126 > (fax) +91-11-24323530 > www.sflc.in > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From iza at anr.org Wed Nov 18 20:33:04 2015 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:33:04 +0900 Subject: [bestbits] Congratulations Carlos Afonso - here are the video clips Message-ID: Dear all, As you may already know, our friend Carlos Afonso was awarded the 2-15 Betinho Prize from APC. https://www.apc.org/en/node/21309/ Here are the video clips including the words from Carlos and also from his son. This includes Carlos's short speech. https://youtu.be/kgVk0Wbxu1E ​And this includes his son's remarks.​ https://youtu.be/dRRrdL0av84 Congratulations to Carlos and your family!! Thank you APC! And ​Please enjoy, please share. izumi​ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nashton at consensus.pro Thu Nov 19 00:44:12 2015 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 06:44:12 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] Various consultations by the ITU related to child one protection Message-ID: <1511e4587e0.2753.9387b8a9f30986f905fcc4cfa238b71f@consensus.pro> Dear all, The ITU has three consultations going on in relation to the above subject, described below. You can find information about the related discussions and proposals at http://www.itu.int/en/council/cwg-cop/Pages/TENTH.aspx Firstly, following the last meeting of the Council Working Group on Child Online Protection (CWG-COP) which was held on 30 September 2015 at ITU HQ, Geneva (Outcome Report) and the discussion held in relation to the IRights contribution, you are kindly invited to participate in the online consultation on IRights at https://www.worldwewant2015.org/itu/i-rights. Secondly, as requested in ITU Plenipotentiary Resolution 179, the Group conducts online consultations for youth, prior to its meetings. You are further encouraged to suggest topics for the next online consultation to be held in 2016. Comments and feedback can be submitted through the online consultation http://www.itu.int/en/council/cwg-cop/Pages/online-consultations.aspx, or sent to Ms. Carla Licciardello at cop at itu.int. Finally, as indicated in the Outcome Report of the last meeting of CWG-COP, we look forward to receiving your written contribution on the COP Framework ( http://www.itu.int/en/council/cwg-cop/Documents/Results%20framework%2029.09.docx) which aims at setting global goals and targets on Child Online Protection at cop at itu.int. From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Thu Nov 19 10:01:43 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:31:43 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] "How putin tried to control the Internet" - an extract from a book In-Reply-To: <3D272FE7-C478-46DB-8012-42991CC150EB@hserus.net> References: <3D272FE7-C478-46DB-8012-42991CC150EB@hserus.net> Message-ID: <564DE457.8070702@riseup.net> Dear Suresh, i do not understand, why you distributed this stupid propaganda on the governance list. Some clear postions of Sen. Vladimir Putin are described, because the authors do not understand the contents. The future of our global telecommunication system is the decentralisation and regional self organizing. And therefore we start to discuss our technical principles to do that. And in this space, the people in Russia are independent cooperators, of course. If the people in Europe and North America are blocked in his thinking, then that is her problem. Not ours. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela Am 17/11/2015 um 10:04 p.m. schrieb Suresh Ramasubramanian: > The extract mentions you, George :) > > http://www.eurasiareview.com/17112015-how-putin-tried-to-control-the-internet-oped/ > ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Thu Nov 19 10:27:51 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 10:57:51 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] "How putin tried to control the Internet" - an extract from a book In-Reply-To: References: <3D272FE7-C478-46DB-8012-42991CC150EB@hserus.net> <564DE457.8070702@riseup.net> Message-ID: <564DEA77.4080704@riseup.net> Dear Analia and Deirdre, i do not see any form of personal attack in my answer. And Suresh answer very sovereign. And what he wrote, it is correct. Your answer i do not understand. Is that directed to the authors of this text? Or to the creaters and organizers of this mafia styled control of the "internet"? Then, ask Louis Pouzin, what he think about. Or any other person with a detailed insight to the construction of the "internet". Yes, i hope, like Suresh proposed, we can start a deeper discussion. Independent for me, whether this text is helpful to find the truth. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela Am 19/11/2015 um 10:36 a.m. schrieb Deirdre Williams: > Dear Willi, > The Charter of the IGC states explicitly among the posting rules: refrain > from personal attacks, insults or slander. > This is a warning that this behaviour will not be tolerated. > Deirdre and Analia > > On 19 November 2015 at 11:01, willi uebelherr > wrote: > >> Dear Suresh, >> >> i do not understand, why you distributed this stupid propaganda on the >> governance list. Some clear postions of Sen. Vladimir Putin are described, >> because the authors do not understand the contents. >> >> The future of our global telecommunication system is the decentralisation >> and regional self organizing. And therefore we start to discuss our >> technical principles to do that. And in this space, the people in Russia >> are independent cooperators, of course. >> >> If the people in Europe and North America are blocked in his thinking, >> then that is her problem. Not ours. >> >> many greetings, willi >> Coro, Venezuela >> >> >> Am 17/11/2015 um 10:04 p.m. schrieb Suresh Ramasubramanian: >> >>> The extract mentions you, George :) >>> >>> >>> http://www.eurasiareview.com/17112015-how-putin-tried-to-control-the-internet-oped/ >>> < >>> http://www.eurasiareview.com/17112015-how-putin-tried-to-control-the-internet-oped/ >>>> >>> >>> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca Thu Nov 19 18:01:21 2015 From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 18:01:21 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] McGill Internships - information about application procedures for sponsoring organizations Message-ID: Dear BB colleagues, I¹ve obtained a copy of the application form to use to propose an internship position (hopeful an ongoing position) for McGill undergraduates. In proposing an internship, simply fill out the attached form and email it directly to Ms. Anne Turner (anne.turner at mcgill.ca), who directs the Faculty of Arts internship program (https://www.mcgill.ca/arts-internships/faculty-arts-internship-office; https://www.facebook.com/aio.mcgill/ ). Also, in your email, indicate to Ms. Turner if you would like the position to be available to students across McGill, or only in the Faculty of Arts. Here¹s a link to the various faculties/programs: http://www.mcgill.ca/faculties/ Keep in mind that McGill is an international university so students come from all over the world and speak many languages; if language proficiency a desirable qualification, feel free to indicate that in your form. For example of other available internships, click here: https://www.mcgill.ca/arts-internships/find/mcgill. Click on "Summer 2016 Internships² to see the variety of positions posted internationally. McGill students are prepared to basically, ³hit the ground running² so consider take the leap to post a policy advocacy internship position or a policy research internship position, etc. Cheers, Becky, McGill University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AIO Information Host Organziations.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 129489 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Fri Nov 20 03:43:08 2015 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 19:43:08 +1100 Subject: [bestbits] Fw: [governance] EOI for Independent Chair for the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) Message-ID: <6E96C660CB51492A993A7AAD1E0B4ED3@Toshiba> Hi everyone, Just a reminder about this – we are looking for nominations by Sunday. And perhaps an explanation – I really believe it is time I should step down from this, because it is important that someone more intimately involved with the range of civil society activities takes over. I find more and more, because I don’t travel to a lot of northern hemisphere meetings, I am dealing with people I have not had the opportunity to meet, and I think it is better someone more active at these meetings take over. I am more than happy to undertake some role to work with or assist whoever takes over, if that would help. I am also happy to make myself available if anyone wants to talk to me about this privately. CSCG has begin to earn the trust of a number of outside bodies, not only IGF, in putting forward names of civil society speakers and representatives for various organisations and events. I think it is important that this role continue, and I ask that you give serious consideration to making sure a suitable person comes forward. Details below. Many Thanks, Ian Peter From: Deirdre Williams Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 11:47 PM To: Internet Governance Subject: [governance] EOI for Independent Chair for the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG) (posted as requested by Ian Peter, the current Independent Chair) EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST AND NOMINATIONS INVITED – INDEPENDENT CHAIR FOR CIVIL SOCIETY COORDINATION GROUP (CSCG) You are invited to present nominations for an Independent Chair for CSCG, to replace Ian Peter whose term expires shortly. Ian has indicated he will not be renominating. The Independent Chair facilitates the work of CSCG in providing a consolidated nomination process for civil society representatives to outside bodies. Current members are representatives of Association for Progressive Communications, Best Bits Coalition, Internet Governance Caucus, Just Net Coalition, and Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN. Nominations are now open and will close on Sunday, November 22. The new Independent Chair will be chosen by a consensus process of the current member representatives. The successful candidate will need to have skills in facilitating and leading selection processes in a timely and efficient manner. The person will need to be able to work beyond their immediate opinions on issues to ensure that all civil society voices are heard and considered in selection processes. They will also be expected to further assist the development and consolidation of CSCG during their two year tenure. The work involves 3-4 selection processes per annum, often with very tight deadlines requiring short periods of fairly intensive work. Expressions of Interest or confirmed nominations should be forwarded to eoichair at internetgov-cs.org no later than midnight UTC, Sunday November 22. The new Independent Chair will be announced shortly thereafter. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From elsa.saade at gmail.com Fri Nov 20 06:56:48 2015 From: elsa.saade at gmail.com (Elsa S) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 13:56:48 +0200 Subject: [bestbits] New article on Cybersecurity and Human Rights In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you for sharing. This is an almost all-encompassing article which I personally enjoyed going through. Hoping that articles in the future will also give a highlight of how this also affects the countries where rule of law does not effectively exist, and where "terrorism" labels human rights defenders, specifically in the Gulf region seeing how the west is a leading role model to these governments who claim justice and respect for human rights. Thanks again, Elsa On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Jonathan Jacobs wrote: > Hi all, > > Just to let everyone know that GPD's Executive Director Andrew Puddephatt > and Head of Programmes Lea Kaspar have co-written an article for > openDemocracy, titled *Cybersecurity is the new battleground for human > rights. * > > In the article, Andrew and Lea argue that human rights defenders need to > start engaging with cybersecurity, both as an urgent threat to our privacy > and Internet freedom and as a potential site for broader debates on what a > free, open and rights-focused Internet might look like. > > It also imagines what a new definition of cybersecurity, centered on the > security and rights of the end user, rather than on systems, might look > like: > > "It might mean a legal and normative shift in our conception of data > ownership, putting ownership and control of personal information in the > hands of the user, rather than the service provider. It might mean > guaranteed end-to-end encryption and public education programs that focus > upon personal privacy and data protection. It could mean instilling > stronger accountability and oversight structures where data collection is > deemed necessary, by ensuring that the scope of such powers is narrowly > defined, and that oversight mechanisms include staff with high level > computer skills, and judicial authorisation for any interference in > people's’ privacy." > > > Read the full article here. > > We'd be interested to hear any feedback on the article; and please share > on your networks with anyone who might be interested. > > Best wishes, > Jonathan > > -- > *Jonathan Jacobs* > Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT > Skype: jonathan.gpdigital > Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 > gp-digital.org > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- -- Elsa Saade Researcher and Capacity Building Officer Gulf Center for Human Rights Beirut, Lebanon M: +961-70925143 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonathan at gp-digital.org Mon Nov 23 10:35:48 2015 From: jonathan at gp-digital.org (Jonathan Jacobs) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 15:35:48 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Zero rating and the silent voices Message-ID: Hi all, Just to let everyone know that we've just published an article by GPD's Executive Director Andrew Puddephatt, entitled Zero rating and the silent voices . In the article, Andrew argues that in current debates around zero-rating networks, one group is strikingly and disturbing absent - *people who don’t have access to the internet. *As a result, current debates around initiatives like Free Basics are unbalanced, based on ideology rather than hard data or feedback from affected communities. To change this, Andrew proposes concrete actions: "To start with, we need to pressure zero-rating service providers to be more transparent and systematic in making data available on reach, uptake and progression onto paid services. We can then take that data and use it to inform an empirical, evidence-led approach to zero-networks - dispassionately analysing their impact through the lens of a broader, positive agenda for better access. We could also push for the inclusion of representatives from low-access communities at internet forums, and undertake research to find out how different communities use zero-rating, and why." Read the full article here: http://www.gp-digital.org/gpd-update/zero-rating-and-the-silent-voices-notes-on-igf-2015/ We'd be interested to hear any feedback on the article; and please share on your networks with anyone who might be interested. Best, Jonathan -- *Jonathan Jacobs* Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT Skype: jonathan.gpdigital Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 gp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmalcolm at eff.org Mon Nov 23 12:06:06 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 09:06:06 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] =?UTF-8?Q?Report=2C_presentations_and_photos_from_Jo?= =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=A3o_Pessoa_Best_Bits_meeting?= Message-ID: <5653477E.3000804@eff.org> The meeting website for the Best Bits João Pessoa meeting has just been updated with a short report of the meeting (which is also copied below), and all of the presentations that I received from participants. For those presenters who didn't give me their slides, please send them to me and I'll add them. You can access these from the Documents tab of the meeting website which is here:http://bestbits.net/events/best-bits-2015/. The photos from the meeting have also been uploaded to our Flickr account which you can access at https://www.flickr.com/photos/105891848 at N03/. The photos are not tagged with names, and I have checked that nobody is featured in photos who asked not to be uploaded online, but if you find yourself in a photo and want to be removed, please let me know. Additionally since we didn't have time to rate the ideas that were generated on the Idea Rating Sheets in the penultimate session, I have uploaded them to an online poll which is linked from the Outcomes tab of the website. I will send a separate message with more information about this shortly. I will also shortly send a separate message about taking forward the work on multi-stakeholder criteria, as discussed in the morning of our meeting. The brief report of the meeting follows: 1. *Policy slam and introductions* Participants introduced themselves and briefly explained the issues that they are working on, to enable informal connections and collaborations to be made. 2. *Criteria of meaningful stakeholder inclusion in Internet governance* Two papers on the topic of the delicate balance between multi-stakeholder processes and democratic legitimacy was presented, and there was a general agreement that interested Best Bits members could form a working group to promote a series of proposed criteria to differentiate between multi-stakeholder processes that are inclusive and democratic, from those that are not. 3. *WSIS+10 update* This session explained the importance of the WSIS+10 process, as the highest level process in which Interent governance principles are being expressed. There was some discussion about the level of ambition in the output document, and the means by which civil society can still participate. Interested participants were invited to a longer session that was to be held on the following day as an IGF pre-event. 4. *Overview of active global venues discussing Internet public policy issues* Following an introductory overview with a mapping of Internet governance institutions, a series of informative presentations were given that zoomed in on a number of these key institutions. These included Internet native institutions such as ICANN, IETF and ISOC, UN bodies such as the General Assembly, CSTD, Human Rights Council and ITU, other intergovernmental bodies such as the Freedom Online Coalition and London Process, and specialised bodies such as WIPO, the WTO and trade negotiations such as TTP, TTIP and TISA. 5. *Catalyzing reform of trade negotiation processes* The next session which followed on from these presentations, although cut short for lack of time, was to have been an exercise that would utilize our shared knowledge about various institutions in the Internet governance regime to identify possible strategies for reclaiming Internet-related policy issues from the closed, secretive trade agreements in which those issues have recently been being decided. This exercise will be continued online. 6. *Best Bits way forward* The results of a survey of Best Bits participants was presented and discussed. There was a clear consensus that Best Bits did continue to have value, although it was identified that having a large steering committee had not been helpful and was not presently sustainable. There was agreement to have a smaller group of volunteer coordinators that could be more action-oriented. One of its main responsibilities would be to organise the annual meeting based on 2-3 targets per meeting, perhaps decided by vote of participants. The existing steering committee was asked to take responsibility for proposing a suitable group of volunteer coordinators going forward. -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Wed Nov 4 10:34:48 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 15:34:48 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Join us at the IGF: NETmundial Solutions Map Workshop (Day Zero, 16:30-18:00) Message-ID: Dear colleagues, [With apologies for cross-posting] On behalf of the session co-organisers, The GovLab and Global Partners Digital , you are cordially invited to join us at the IGF Day Zero workshop “NETmundial Solutions Map” , taking place from 16:30 to 18:00 on Monday, November 9 , in workshop room 5. The NETmundial Solutions Map is a crowd-sourced Internet governance information-sharing resource launched by the NETmundial Initiative. The platform is meant to act as a tool where information on Internet governance issues can be shared and curated by its users as to enable collaborative and innovative approaches to how we steer the further evolution of the Internet. The session will provide participants with an opportunity to learn about the status of the initiative, but also test its many features and provide user feedback. Just like the Internet governance ecosystem, the Map relies on bottom-up participation to create value. We would be delighted to learn from you on how to develop and improve the map so that I can help you! If feasible, let us know if you plan on attending, and feel free forwarding this invitation to your colleagues. In the meantime do check whether you are already #Onthemap by visiting https://map.netmundial.org/ and either add or edit your entry today! Looking forward to seeing you in Joao Pessoa! Warm wishes, Stefaan & Lea --- Are you #Onthemap? - Let's map internet governance together! Become a contributor today at map.netmundial.org Interested in becoming a partner? Contact Stefaan Verhulst at stefaan at thegovlab.org Follow us on Twitter --- *Lea Kaspar* Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspar gp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmalcolm at eff.org Mon Nov 23 12:07:02 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 09:07:02 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] =?UTF-8?Q?Idea_Rating_Sheets_from_Best_Bits_Jo=C3=A3o_?= =?UTF-8?Q?Pessoa_meeting?= Message-ID: <565347B6.3020709@eff.org> Here is some more information about the Idea Rating Sheets activity from the Best Bits João Pessoa meeting. Apologies that because presentations in the previous session overran considerably, we couldn't properly complete the Idea Rating Sheets in the following session. Nonetheless to my pleasant surprise, even though we had to compress that activity into less than a quarter of the time that it was meant to occupy, we still received an amazing 32 ideas. A few people were able to rate those ideas using the paper Idea Rating Sheets before we closed, but for those who didn't, you have the opportunity to do so using digitised versions that I have uploaded as a questionnaire here: http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index/sid/645723&lang=en Most of them are ideas for strategies to wrest back control of Internet policy issues from closed trade negotiations; but a few ideas are on broader topics (which is fine, because the original plan if we'd had more time was to seek ideas on a range of Internet governance reforms and innovations). This activity was just a taste for an upcoming invitation-only meeting in Brussels on January 27-28, 2016, at which we will be hosting private expert dialogue to work on possible reforms to processes of trade negotiation that bear on these Internet-related issues, that would bring them in line with norms of transparency and public participation, drawn in part from the discourse surrounding Internet governance. If you would like to apply to participate at this event and believe that you have expertise to contribute, we welcome you to express your interest. Some travel funding is available for those in need. More information and a registration form for expressing interest in attending are available here: https://www.eff.org/event/trade-reform-meeting -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From lists at digitaldissidents.org Mon Nov 23 12:22:20 2015 From: lists at digitaldissidents.org (Niels ten Oever) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 18:22:20 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] New article on Cybersecurity and Human Rights In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56534B4C.9070101@digitaldissidents.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi Jonathan, Thanks for this! The idea of being in control over your own data and allow third parties access on your conditions is not new. It has been mentioned by Tim Berners-Lee before and the people in the Social Web Working Group in W3C have been doing quite some work on it: http://www.w3.org/Social/WG Hope this helps. Cheers, Niels On 11/18/2015 06:03 PM, Jonathan Jacobs wrote: > Hi all, > > Just to let everyone know that GPD's Executive Director Andrew > Puddephatt and Head of Programmes Lea Kaspar have co-written an > article for openDemocracy, titled *Cybersecurity is the new > battleground for human rights. * > > In the article, Andrew and Lea argue that human rights defenders > need to start engaging with cybersecurity, both as an urgent threat > to our privacy and Internet freedom and as a potential site for > broader debates on what a free, open and rights-focused Internet > might look like. > > It also imagines what a new definition of cybersecurity, centered > on the security and rights of the end user, rather than on systems, > might look like: > > "It might mean a legal and normative shift in our conception of > data ownership, putting ownership and control of personal > information in the hands of the user, rather than the service > provider. It might mean guaranteed end-to-end encryption and public > education programs that focus upon personal privacy and data > protection. It could mean instilling stronger accountability and > oversight structures where data collection is deemed necessary, by > ensuring that the scope of such powers is narrowly defined, and > that oversight mechanisms include staff with high level computer > skills, and judicial authorisation for any interference in > people's’ privacy." > > > Read the full article here. > > We'd be interested to hear any feedback on the article; and please > share on your networks with anyone who might be interested. > > Best wishes, Jonathan > > -- *Jonathan Jacobs* Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL > PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London > EC2A 4LT Skype: jonathan.gpdigital Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 > gp-digital.org > > > > ____________________________________________________________ You > received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your > settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > - -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWU0tMAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpw+QH/A822E55+gzyAaYHvNpuflhO EwSn2T4o0XA673KR/56a6GFOBrkzPUMMOQHAx0tPwPO6XO78v0td5tf0Gk6CZvv7 sIx3H0KmXGw1aF72clpgwwvFGkVg6qt+qkj5+uHYHRrxHyLnyD3MdeW5P2W2H/lN zQNH9GaoR3/3H5zuvT9aUF5bF/gpE9GGxxya9Zn8RvlFIxC8D5/kjqeK4hH3BTam OJm6htf42KvSr2CjbEhe5QyWOe+GQ7tVz/yF8Y7X6L9HZSynn/omgdM4fgtdZMiP m9CdHwq/jxAL0xdC/+Xc3MEkc6soMwdiGT1ICkKwfeFlMDiW5MvROPOObYdtPWQ= =N2bR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Mon Nov 23 16:06:38 2015 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 17:06:38 -0400 Subject: [bestbits] Zero rating and the silent voices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am very happy to discover that this is of concern to others as well. I brought it up in WS21, the SIDS Roundtable on Thursday morning (12th), and again in WS235 (??) the reporting on the Stanford Deliberative Poll on Friday morning (13th). Considering the benefits of consultation and inclusion we are promised for the age of the internet it seems rather cavalier to talk of "connecting the next billion" without asking them about how, or indeed whether, they would like to be connected. So thank you for the article Deirdre On 23 November 2015 at 11:35, Jonathan Jacobs wrote: > Hi all, > > Just to let everyone know that we've just published an article by GPD's > Executive Director Andrew Puddephatt, entitled Zero rating and the silent > voices > > . > > In the article, Andrew argues that in current debates around zero-rating > networks, one group is strikingly and disturbing absent - *people who > don’t have access to the internet. *As a result, current debates around > initiatives like Free Basics are unbalanced, based on ideology rather than > hard data or feedback from affected communities. To change this, Andrew > proposes concrete actions: > > "To start with, we need to pressure zero-rating service providers to be > more transparent and systematic in making data available on reach, uptake > and progression onto paid services. We can then take that data and use it > to inform an empirical, evidence-led approach to zero-networks - > dispassionately analysing their impact through the lens of a broader, > positive agenda for better access. We could also push for the inclusion of > representatives from low-access communities at internet forums, and > undertake research to find out how different communities use zero-rating, > and why." > > > Read the full article here: > http://www.gp-digital.org/gpd-update/zero-rating-and-the-silent-voices-notes-on-igf-2015/ > > We'd be interested to hear any feedback on the article; and please share > on your networks with anyone who might be interested. > > Best, > Jonathan > > -- > *Jonathan Jacobs* > Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT > Skype: jonathan.gpdigital > Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 > gp-digital.org > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steve at openmedia.org Mon Nov 23 18:42:36 2015 From: steve at openmedia.org (Steve Anderson) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 15:42:36 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] =?UTF-8?Q?Idea_Rating_Sheets_from_Best_Bits_Jo?= =?UTF-8?Q?=C3=A3o_Pessoa_meeting?= In-Reply-To: <565347B6.3020709@eff.org> References: <565347B6.3020709@eff.org> Message-ID: This great Jeremy! Thanks for the opportunity to weigh in on the ideas. I see a lot of the ideas focus on trade agreements. For those interested FYI OpenMedia released a report focused primarily on TPP, copyright and free expression that you might find useful. It can be found here: https://connectedfuture.org/ Thanks again to the many of you who help put it together. It was a long process with many hands. -- *Steve Anderson* Executive Director | OpenMedia.org | *The Internet Needs You -->>* http://openmedia.org 604-837-5730 Follow me on Twitter Friend me on Facebook **You have the right to link to content and services of your choice online -->> Save The Link * *Confidentiality Warning:* * This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.Information confidentielle:** Le présent message, ainsi que tout fichier qui y est joint, est envoyé à l'intention exclusive de son ou de ses destinataires; il est de nature confidentielle et peut constituer une information privilégiée. Nous avertissons toute personne autre que le destinataire prévu que tout examen, réacheminement, impression, copie, distribution ou autre utilisation de ce message et de tout fichier qui y est joint est strictement interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, veuillez en aviser immédiatement l'expéditeur par retour de courriel et supprimer ce message et tout document joint de votre système. Merci.* On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Here is some more information about the Idea Rating Sheets activity from > the Best Bits João Pessoa meeting. > > Apologies that because presentations in the previous session overran > considerably, we couldn't properly complete the Idea Rating Sheets in the > following session. Nonetheless to my pleasant surprise, even though we had > to compress that activity into less than a quarter of the time that it was > meant to occupy, we still received an amazing 32 ideas. A few people were > able to rate those ideas using the paper Idea Rating Sheets before we > closed, but for those who didn't, you have the opportunity to do so using > digitised versions that I have uploaded as a questionnaire here: > > http://bestbits.net/limesurvey/index.php?r=survey/index/sid/645723&lang=en > > Most of them are ideas for strategies to wrest back control of Internet > policy issues from closed trade negotiations; but a few ideas are on > broader topics (which is fine, because the original plan if we'd had more > time was to seek ideas on a range of Internet governance reforms and > innovations). > > This activity was just a taste for an upcoming invitation-only meeting in > Brussels on January 27-28, 2016, at which we will be hosting private expert > dialogue to work on possible reforms to processes of trade negotiation that > bear on these Internet-related issues, that would bring them in line with > norms of transparency and public participation, drawn in part from the > discourse surrounding Internet governance. If you would like to apply to > participate at this event and believe that you have expertise to > contribute, we welcome you to express your interest. Some travel funding > is available for those in need. More information and a registration form > for expressing interest in attending are available here: > > https://www.eff.org/event/trade-reform-meeting > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Global Policy Analyst > Electronic Frontier Foundationhttps://eff.orgjmalcolm at eff.org > > Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 > > :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: > > Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt > PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 > OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD > > Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at difference.com.au Mon Nov 23 19:20:38 2015 From: dave at difference.com.au (David Cake) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 08:20:38 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] New article on Cybersecurity and Human Rights In-Reply-To: <56534B4C.9070101@digitaldissidents.org> References: <56534B4C.9070101@digitaldissidents.org> Message-ID: <0DCB063C-FB35-4856-B238-7D811F5829F8@difference.com.au> Of course its not a new idea for people to be in control over their own data - but I think Andrew and Lea make a valuable contribution here in eloquently making the argument that privacy rights and being in control over your own data is not just a right to be protected (that might then be understood to sometimes be in conflict with national security), but rather in the internet world of porous borders an absolutely intrinsic part of national security. We need to strongly express the argument in the cybersecurity debate that any proposal to weaken individual privacy and security in the name of ‘national security’ (such as data retention or mass surveillance proposals, and absolutely efforts to weaken access to encryption or mandate ‘backdoors’) is misguided and actually weakens national security in a very meaningful way. The rights argument and control over our own data should go without saying to civil society - but we can expect the security establishment to weigh arguments differently. David > On 24 Nov 2015, at 1:22 AM, Niels ten Oever wrote: > > Signed PGP part > Hi Jonathan, > > Thanks for this! The idea of being in control over your own data and > allow third parties access on your conditions is not new. It has been > mentioned by Tim Berners-Lee before and the people in the Social Web > Working Group in W3C have been doing quite some work on it: > http://www.w3.org/Social/WG > > Hope this helps. > > Cheers, > > Niels > > > On 11/18/2015 06:03 PM, Jonathan Jacobs wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Just to let everyone know that GPD's Executive Director Andrew > > Puddephatt and Head of Programmes Lea Kaspar have co-written an > > article for openDemocracy, titled *Cybersecurity is the new > > battleground for human rights. * > > > > In the article, Andrew and Lea argue that human rights defenders > > need to start engaging with cybersecurity, both as an urgent threat > > to our privacy and Internet freedom and as a potential site for > > broader debates on what a free, open and rights-focused Internet > > might look like. > > > > It also imagines what a new definition of cybersecurity, centered > > on the security and rights of the end user, rather than on systems, > > might look like: > > > > "It might mean a legal and normative shift in our conception of > > data ownership, putting ownership and control of personal > > information in the hands of the user, rather than the service > > provider. It might mean guaranteed end-to-end encryption and public > > education programs that focus upon personal privacy and data > > protection. It could mean instilling stronger accountability and > > oversight structures where data collection is deemed necessary, by > > ensuring that the scope of such powers is narrowly defined, and > > that oversight mechanisms include staff with high level computer > > skills, and judicial authorisation for any interference in > > people's’ privacy." > > > > > > Read the full article here. > > > > We'd be interested to hear any feedback on the article; and please > > share on your networks with anyone who might be interested. > > > > Best wishes, Jonathan > > > > -- *Jonathan Jacobs* Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL > > PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London > > EC2A 4LT Skype: jonathan.gpdigital Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 > > gp-digital.org > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ You > > received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your > > settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > Niels ten Oever > Head of Digital > > Article 19 > www.article19.org > > PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 > 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From mishi at softwarefreedom.org Tue Nov 24 16:00:24 2015 From: mishi at softwarefreedom.org (Mishi Choudhary) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 16:00:24 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] TPP & Free Software In-Reply-To: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC6B72@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> References: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC6B72@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> Message-ID: <5654CFE8.5040900@softwarefreedom.org> Here is a piece SFLC wrote on TPP Article 14.17 & Free Software: No Harm, No Foul http://softwarefreedom.org/blog/2015/nov/23/TPP-Article-14/ -- Warm Regards Mishi Choudhary, Esq. Legal Director Software Freedom Law Center 1995 Broadway Floor 17 New York, NY-10023 (tel) 212-461-1912 (fax) 212-580-0898 www.softwarefreedom.org Executive Director SFLC.IN K-9, Second Floor Jangpura Extn. New Delhi-110014 (tel) +91-11-43587126 (fax) +91-11-24323530 www.sflc.in From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Tue Nov 24 19:29:00 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 19:29:00 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Global Connect Call Message-ID: Hi folks, Sorry for cross-post, but it is a holiday week in some parts of the world. So I am in my lazy/slow mode. ;-) And please, share with your contacts. *I - What this email is about: PUT IN YOUR CALENDARS * This is an email to invite you all for a conference call with the US State Department on the Global Connect Initiative. They reached out to a couple of CS folks to make themselves available to discuss the initiative with CS and be available to address any questions any of you might have. *The call - details still to be confirmed - will be held on December 1st. *Manu Bhardwaj (bhardwajm at state.gov) is one of the magician who is now moving forward with the effort and who is the core contact on this, if you need it. *II - Global Connect:* As some of you might know and might actually be engaged with, the Sate Department launched a cross-agency initiative called Global Connect. which will include some events in NY, during the UNGA meeting this December. Based on the last information I've known of, they already have many supports and expression of support from countries around the world - including a bunch in Africa and Asia - and also many of the companies that, in a way or another, are involved in providing services and products for access. Over 20 NGOs supported the initiative during its launch, in NY, including Alliance for Affordable Internet (part of the Web Foundation), PK, AccessNow and others from the Global South. International organizations, including the World Bank, are also involved. Expression of support by Best Bits community - http://bestbits.net/global-connect-initiative/ And example of a company's support: http://www.itic.org/news-events/news-releases/tech-indusetry-releases-statements-lauding-state-department-s-global-connect-initiative Launch event webcast: http://webtv.un.org/watch/development-in-the-digital-age-high-level-panel-discussion/4513663507001 *III - Core Principles* The core principles of this initiative are: 1) Countries integrate Internet connectivity as a key part of their national development strategy and budget process and consult with all stakeholders in doing so; 2) International financial institutions and international development organizations prioritize digital access, including in the projects they support; 3) All stakeholders promote the linkage between the use of technology, expression, transparency and innovation; and the overall social, economic, and political benefits reaped from connectivity; 4) All stakeholders promote dialogue and action on how to harness, deploy, and enable innovative technologies to support quality, affordable and sustainable connectivity for the unconnected, particularly in power-deficient communities. *IV - New York in December * On December 16th, the US will host a invitation-only event mostly with the launch partners and some new countries that are joining the initiative. It seems that, du to the lack of space in the venue they secured, this will not be a open event. BUT, the State department is interested in hosting a event with CS that will be in NY for the UNGA meeting. I do not have the details for now. We all hope to hear more soon. (note - I will NOT be in NY, but I hope many of you will and will try to check this out). *V - After New York > Washington in April 2016 * To advance these goals, the State Department will host a high-level conference in Washington in mid-April, likely on the margins of the Bank/Fund Spring meetings, that aims to showcase policies and innovative public and private approaches to expand global connectivity, to encourage collaboration among stakeholders to increase Internet availability and access, and to gather commitments in support of the Global Connect objectives. *VI - And * As soon as I learn more about this, I will be here sharing with you. Other should feel free to jump in if they have more information. And feel free to reach out to Manu directly if you or your organization want to get more involved. Best, C -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jmalcolm at eff.org Tue Nov 24 20:29:23 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 17:29:23 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] Strategy Meeting on Catalyzing Reform of Trade Negotiation Processes Message-ID: <56550EF3.1030504@eff.org> Dear Best Bits participants, Following on from the discussions at our meeting in João Pessoa, EFF would like to invite interested experts to a express their interest in attending an event on the reform of trade negotiation processes in Brussels on 27 and 28 January 2016. Limited travel support is available for those in need. With the conclusion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and regardless of opinions on its overall merits, there is broad agreement from all sides (consumers, industry, and even other government agencies), that the process by which these agreements are negotiated is completely inappropriate for developing global policies that impact on the digital and online environment, for which a much more transparent, inclusive and multi-stakeholder process is required. This strategy meeting on catalyzing reform of trade negotiation processes will be to bring together experts to develop concrete strategies to generate actionable strategies for reclaiming Internet-related public policy development from closed, captured trade negotiation processes. Strategies to be considered may involve catalyzing reforms to the procedural norms of multilateral trade negotiations, and/or redirecting Internet-related policy discussions away from trade negotiations to more open and inclusive fora. To express your interest in attending, please visit our meeting website at https://www.eff.org/event/trade-reform-meeting. Numbers are limited, and shortlisting of participants as well as funding support will be based on their expertise and willingness to contribute. You may feel free to circulate this information to interested colleagues and contacts, but on the above proviso that we are seeking those with proven expertise to contribute to this effort. Further information will be added soon, but we welcome your expressions of interest now. -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Wed Nov 25 00:28:04 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:58:04 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] TPP & Free Software In-Reply-To: <5654CFE8.5040900@softwarefreedom.org> References: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC6B72@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> <5654CFE8.5040900@softwarefreedom.org> Message-ID: Hello Mishi A good analysis. This professional analysis could also be expanded a little more to look for and spot ideas from earlier Bills that became controversial and withdrawn (for e.g SOPA), but reworded and introduced as part of TPP. Thank you. Sivasubramanian M On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Mishi Choudhary wrote: > Here is a piece SFLC wrote on TPP Article 14.17 & Free Software: No > Harm, No Foul > > http://softwarefreedom.org/blog/2015/nov/23/TPP-Article-14/ > > -- > Warm Regards > Mishi Choudhary, Esq. > Legal Director > Software Freedom Law Center > 1995 Broadway Floor 17 > New York, NY-10023 > (tel) 212-461-1912 > (fax) 212-580-0898 > www.softwarefreedom.org > > > Executive Director > SFLC.IN > K-9, Second Floor > Jangpura Extn. > New Delhi-110014 > (tel) +91-11-43587126 > (fax) +91-11-24323530 > www.sflc.in > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Wed Nov 25 15:46:28 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2015 15:46:28 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Global Connect Call In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Call information confirmed December 1st at 9:30amEST US calls: +1 877-336-1839 All other international calls: +1 636-651-0008 Access Code: 8542435 On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Carolina Rossini < carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi folks, > > Sorry for cross-post, but it is a holiday week in some parts of the world. > So I am in my lazy/slow mode. ;-) And please, share with your contacts. > > *I - What this email is about: PUT IN YOUR CALENDARS * > > This is an email to invite you all for a conference call with the US State > Department on the Global Connect Initiative. They reached out to a couple > of CS folks to make themselves available to discuss the initiative with CS > and be available to address any questions any of you might have. *The > call - details still to be confirmed - will be held on December 1st. *Manu > Bhardwaj (bhardwajm at state.gov) is one of the magician who is now moving > forward with the effort and who is the core contact on this, if you need > it. > > *II - Global Connect:* > > As some of you might know and might actually be engaged with, the Sate > Department launched a cross-agency initiative called Global Connect. which > will include some events in NY, during the UNGA meeting this December. > Based on the last information I've known of, they already have many > supports and expression of support from countries around the world - > including a bunch in Africa and Asia - and also many of the companies that, > in a way or another, are involved in providing services and products for > access. Over 20 NGOs supported the initiative during its launch, in NY, > including Alliance for Affordable Internet (part of the Web Foundation), > PK, AccessNow and others from the Global South. International > organizations, including the World Bank, are also involved. > > Expression of support by Best Bits community - > http://bestbits.net/global-connect-initiative/ > > > And example of a company's support: > http://www.itic.org/news-events/news-releases/tech-indusetry-releases-statements-lauding-state-department-s-global-connect-initiative > > > Launch event webcast: > http://webtv.un.org/watch/development-in-the-digital-age-high-level-panel-discussion/4513663507001 > > > *III - Core Principles* > > The core principles of this initiative are: > > 1) Countries integrate Internet connectivity as a key part of their > national development strategy and budget process and consult with all > stakeholders in doing so; > > 2) International financial institutions and international development > organizations prioritize digital access, including in the projects they > support; > > 3) All stakeholders promote the linkage between the use of technology, > expression, transparency and innovation; and the overall social, economic, > and political benefits reaped from connectivity; > > 4) All stakeholders promote dialogue and action on how to harness, deploy, > and enable innovative technologies to support quality, affordable and > sustainable connectivity for the unconnected, particularly in > power-deficient communities. > > *IV - New York in December * > > On December 16th, the US will host a invitation-only event mostly with the > launch partners and some new countries that are joining the initiative. It > seems that, du to the lack of space in the venue they secured, this will > not be a open event. BUT, the State department is interested in hosting a > event with CS that will be in NY for the UNGA meeting. I do not have the > details for now. We all hope to hear more soon. (note - I will NOT be in > NY, but I hope many of you will and will try to check this out). > > *V - After New York > Washington in April 2016 * > > To advance these goals, the State Department will host a high-level > conference in Washington in mid-April, likely on the margins of the > Bank/Fund Spring meetings, that aims to showcase policies and innovative > public and private approaches to expand global connectivity, to encourage > collaboration among stakeholders to increase Internet availability and > access, and to gather commitments in support of the Global Connect > objectives. > > *VI - And * > > As soon as I learn more about this, I will be here sharing with you. Other > should feel free to jump in if they have more information. And feel free > to reach out to Manu directly if you or your organization want to get more > involved. > > Best, C > > -- > *Carolina Rossini * > *Vice President, International Policy* > *Public Knowledge* > *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * > + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini > > -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 08:50:38 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 08:50:38 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] TPP text now OUT Message-ID: http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Treaties-and-International-Law/01-Treaties-for-which-NZ-is-Depositary/0-Trans-Pacific-Partnership.php -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Thu Nov 26 15:49:28 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 16:19:28 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses Message-ID: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> The decentralization of IP addresses. We need a completely self-organizing Internet. And this is possible only through massive decentralization. We can look at the difficulties at the beginning of the Internet with tolerance. They were mostly of a technical nature. But today we have other conditions. And from these other conditions arise other possibilities. It is about the IP address. It is necessary to ensure that the packets find their direct route to their targets. The router work with numbers. We humans with text. The content is the same. Only the representation is different. The Internet, a transport system for digital data in packet form, needs this destination address to forward the packets to their destinations can. The packets include this destination. With that, the packets are the instance to enable and orient the router. All transport systems operate on the basis of geographical processes. We transport from position A to position B. Consider. The transport of digital data They are comparable with boxes. In the case the data are. They do not care. Outside sticking a piece of paper with the source address, destination address and some information about the transport. These boxes are being made from the transport routes such as the cars and buses on the roads. Consider the transport of digital data. The IP packets are comparable to cases in which the data are packed. But the data do not interest us. Outside sticking a piece of paper with the source address, destination address and some information about the transport. These boxes flows over the transport routes such as the cars and buses on the roads. At the branches we have to decide how to proceed. There are the routers. They look at the paper and read the destination address. This is converted to the geographical position and compared to the geographical position of the router. The result is a directional angle and the distance. And with that each router can immediately decide in which direction it goes on. We have thus fulfilled the first requirement. The global part of the IP address is always derived from the geographical position of the local network. How we do this is an object of our global discussion and cooperation based on the RFCs (Request for Comment). A very simple way. The local part of the IP address is always self-determined in the local network. We do not need to know the schema of resolution outside of the local network. In the DNS request we also get this part. The decisive factor for this solution that we need in the future no Internet Governance. No organizations that compete for the award of rights of IP addresses. No organizations whose livelihood is based on the sale of global IP addresses. With many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela From javier at accessnow.org Thu Nov 26 16:49:40 2015 From: javier at accessnow.org (Javier Pallero) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 18:49:40 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] RightsCon 2016 - call for sessions Message-ID: Dear Friends, We are delighted to invite you to submit a proposal to organize a program session for RightsCon Silicon Valley 2016 (Wednesday March 30- Friday April 1, 2016). We are currently accepting proposals until our deadline on Friday, December 4, 2015, so act quickly! As you know, it's an amazing event that brings together hundreds of folks working in tech, human rights, digital security, and freedom of expression. This year’s event will be better than ever, with three days of programming, exciting satellite events like the Crypto Summit, and potentially 1000 participants from across sectors. It’s the best opportunity to showcase your work in digital rights, connect with other leading experts, and most importantly, develop outcomes, best-practices, and policies that help defend and extend the digital rights of users at risk around the world. Submit a Session by December 4 You can submit your program session proposal on our website’s submission form, and find more information about our session formats, the RightsCon style and our themes on the submission guide. We encourage you to submit a high quality proposal, as competition is steep, and we are developing a fantastic and compelling agenda for participants. Organizers of program sessions may be eligible for ticket discounts. Attending RightsCon 2016 Tickets are on sale now in limited Early Registration pricing, so act quick before these discount tickets run out. Pricing will increase to their regular values in December, so make sure to register sooner rather than later. We’d love for you to join us at this important event. If you have any questions about your session proposal or registration, please let us know, either by contacting me or our RightsCon Coordinator at  conference at accessnow.org.   Best regards,  --- Javier Pallero Policy Analyst / Analista de Politicas Access Now | accessnow.org PGP 0xEBFD028A Fingerprint 0503 FBA1 10B2 B83C 61FC FE3B 4E7E EBDD EBFD 028A Participe de RightsCon Silicon Valley, del 30 de Marzo al 1 de Abril de 2016: rightscon.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From raquino at gmail.com Thu Nov 26 19:19:14 2015 From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 21:19:14 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] Call for research fellows - Recife, Northeast Brazil Message-ID: Hello Although this call for research is not specific to internet governance, this is a main theme of investigation in many of the universities in the region, the same that hosted IGF2015. Do count on the Brazilian Internet School of Governance graduates Egi.br for any help w/ the Portuguese if needed --- http://ciel.network/call-for-fellows-platforms-for-the-future Call for Fellows - Platforms for the Future Por CESAR.EDU.BR em 23 de Novembro de 2015 | 15:35 CIEL.network's fellows program hopes to bring together a diverse group of people with different types of expertise and knowledge to the area of PORTO DIGITAL, in RECIFE, Brazil, one of the top brazilian metro regions and one of the country's main technology and educational hubs. We are looking for scientists, intellectuals, entrepreneurs, geeks, innovative thinkers, change makers, and creative people that want to understand what is going on at a technology network, contribute to its development, learn, teach and try to multiply their experiments with us back home. CIEL.network's fellows program aims to bring people to an established, innovative and developing environment, trying to put together both community and individual initiatives. Fellows will be expected to participate in general weekly activities, such as seminars and discussion groups and encouraged to work in their own projects in collaboration with at least two CIEL institutions and, if possible, with other fellows and members of the staff of institutions of the CIEL.network. The fellowship program ranges from a short-term option of three months to a long-term of one year and can be extended at the end of these terms depending on the results from the project the fellow is working on. In the first year we welcome TEN FELLOWS in part- or full-time activities. Prospective fellows are encouraged to think out of the box, system, theories and environments to imagine a project or set of activities to be executed during the program term. We are open to a wide range of areas, favoring cross and interdisciplinary proposals, that could possibly tackle big challenges and opportunities in domains that can be represented by questions like... How can we foster new and more effective linkages among Creativity, Innovation and Entrepreneurship, especially when Academia, Industry and Investment are involved? How can we do large scale transformations -in society, economies, systems, firms...- through innovative design techniques and methods? How can we process Complex/Large Scale Data Sets and Flows and use the results to really transform the daily life of people... and for the better? How can we design revolutionary applications in the creative economy -which are they?...- using the new digital media? How to make everything smarter (from things to cities), for people and society? How to improve the foundations of the Internet of Things and use them [together with a lot of other "things"] to create radically innovative applications? How to make robots really useful outside industrial applications and demos? At home, for example? How to make "design" (in the sense of innovation) a vector for the transformation of society? How to fill the educational gap of underprivileged populations in a scalable way, feaseble, short term way? Is it possible? At what cost? With which means? How to use digital technologies as means of expression to make a quantum leap in the educational system? How do we break the mold of the mainstream models of innovation and improve the success rate of the Clusters, Technological Parks, Local Innovation Systems, all over the world? How will we [re]build cities where life can be lived in a much more smart and sustainable way and what is the role of digital technologies in doing so? Applicants' Qualifications We decided not have a pre-defined set of requirements for applications. We want to encourage interesting people with diverse background and life paths, not necessarily from academia, to apply, without disencouraging smart, hard working PhD holders, specially young ones, to come and be with us for a period. And people in all stages of the career, from clever interns to energetic retirees are welcomed. In summary, we look for interesting people interested in being part of a developing ecosystem of innovation, the one at PORTO DIGITAL. Resources available to the fellows CIEL.network will not offer grants and subsidies for now; fellows, apart from the environment and network to work in and with, will be given a letter of acceptance from one of our institutions, and a package that includes office space and all related infrastructure, creative people to work with, great problems to solve and innovate upon. Fellows are encouraged to obtain funding through other means, outside grants, from their home institution, or other forms of scholarship. In case of accepted applicants that need a Brazilian visa, we will help the fellow to deal with the Brazilian immigration papers and processes. Application In order to apply to be a CIEL.network fellow, please send, to fabio.campos at cesar.edu.br, at least the following: An up to date Curriculum Vitae, including a list of recent results, with a one page abstract. A personal statement of your motivation to be in RECIFE and at CIEL.network. A plan of activities to conduct during the fellowship, its objectives and expected results. A plan of at least 5 seminars you will give while staying with CIEL.network and... How do you plan to disseminate what you will do while with us. Deadlines and Results We are working with the following initial deadlines... Submission: 30th January 2016 Notification of acceptance: 29th February 2016 Fellowship staring at April/Mai 2016 Submission: 30th Mai 2016 Notification of acceptance: 30th June 2016 Fellowship staring at August/September 2016 Submission: 30th September 2016 Notification of acceptance: 30th October 2016 Fellowship staring at January/February 2017 but the begin/end dates for your stay with us can be discussed at a case to case basis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Fri Nov 27 15:04:15 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 15:34:15 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> Message-ID: <5658B73F.5090707@riseup.net> Dear Bill, yes, i will help, that many people on our planet can start with that in a cooperation together. It is impossible for a single person or a small group. And based on my principles for the local/regional self-organizing the intercontinental and intercultural cooperation is a must. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela Am 27/11/2015 um 01:21 p.m. schrieb Bill Woodcock: > >> On Nov 26, 2015, at 12:49 PM, willi uebelherr wrote: >> The global part of the IP address is always derived from the geographical position of the local network. > > …and the rest is a simple matter of programming, right? > > Geographical address assignment is a fallacy that innumerate people have pursued for decades. When it comes to providing an actionable plan for implementation, however, none of the attempts has persisted. Perhaps you can be the first! > > -Bill > From dave at difference.com.au Sat Nov 28 01:18:16 2015 From: dave at difference.com.au (David Cake) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 14:18:16 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> Message-ID: <6DD55BC7-2BBD-484E-BD1D-39124BDCACE6@difference.com.au> > On 27 Nov 2015, at 4:49 AM, willi uebelherr wrote: > > > The decentralization of IP addresses. > > We need a completely self-organizing Internet. And this is possible only through massive decentralization. We can look at the difficulties at the beginning of the Internet with tolerance. They were mostly of a technical nature. But today we have other conditions. And from these other conditions arise other possibilities. > > It is about the IP address. It is necessary to ensure that the packets find their direct route to their targets. The router work with numbers. We humans with text. The content is the same. Only the representation is different. it is important to understand that names and numbers do not have a 1 to 1 correspondence. Rather, names are an abstraction layer that serves a number of purposes, and its generally a many to many relationship, but that doesn’t work quite the same way for all services. > > The Internet, a transport system for digital data in packet form, needs this destination address to forward the packets to their destinations can. The packets include this destination. With that, the packets are the instance to enable and orient the router. > > All transport systems operate on the basis of geographical processes. We transport from position A to position B. Consider. The transport of digital data They are comparable with boxes. In the case the data are. They do not care. Outside sticking a piece of paper with the source address, destination address and some information about the transport. These boxes are being made from the transport routes such as the cars and buses on the roads. As Suresh said, please con’t confuse the Internet with the postal service. While the Internet has to eventually deliver to some physical destination somewhere, that this physical destination is mostly abstracted away from the way we use Internets naming and routing protocols is by design, and has many good reasons why it is so. > [snip large section of argument that the Internet should work like the postal service] > The local part of the IP address is always self-determined in the local network. Are you referring to NAT? because not everyone uses NAT, and there are good reasons why it might be preferable not to use it for many people. > We do not need to know the schema of resolution outside of the local network. In the DNS request we also get this part. > > The decisive factor for this solution that we need in the future no Internet Governance. Systems that are geographically based, like the postal and phone systems, involve a great deal of governance. Just ask the ITU. The main difference is that it is largely done by states. Why would your proposal be different? > No organizations that compete for the award of rights of IP addresses. No organizations whose livelihood is based on the sale of global IP addresses. Why would states not compete for the award of rights of IP addresses if they were organised globally? Why do you wish to get rid of the RIRs? How do you think this relates to names, do you think that global generic (as opposed to country) names are a bad idea or is your proposal only for numbers? You’ve suggested these ideas a few times before. They raise a lot of questions, and I think in general many of us would disagree with quite a few of your assumptions. It is always worth questioning even fairly basic assumptions, but I think your ideas are both misguided in their intent, and are based on some fairly basic misunderstandings of how the internet works. Regards David > > With many greetings, willi > Coro, Venezuela > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From cedric at gn.apc.org Sat Nov 28 04:08:41 2015 From: cedric at gn.apc.org (Cedric Knight) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 09:08:41 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: <6DD55BC7-2BBD-484E-BD1D-39124BDCACE6@difference.com.au> References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <6DD55BC7-2BBD-484E-BD1D-39124BDCACE6@difference.com.au> Message-ID: <56596F19.1010407@gn.apc.org> Hi - my first post to bestbits list, cutting down on the cross-posting a bit. On 28/11/15 06:18, David Cake wrote: >> On 27 Nov 2015, at 4:49 AM, willi uebelherr wrote: >> >> The decentralization of IP addresses. >> >> We need a completely self-organizing Internet. And this is possible >> only through massive decentralization. We can look at the >> difficulties at the beginning of the Internet with tolerance. They >> were mostly of a technical nature. But today we have other >> conditions. And from these other conditions arise other >> possibilities. [snip] >> The decisive factor for this solution that we need in the future no Internet Governance. > > Systems that are geographically based, like the postal and phone > systems, involve a great deal of governance. Just ask the ITU. The > main difference is that it is largely done by states. Why would your > proposal be different? Good question, but given the possibilities opened up by ICTs, would it not be premature to assume that other models *cannot* exist, and that managing an address space (or certification such as PKI) always has to require any central or hierarchical co-ordination? There is often an assumption that fully decentralised addressing does not scale as it may require each node to store a full set of identifiers - however, that's not so different from internet routing tables that consist of over half a million IP prefixes. It may be possible to route globally unique identifiers and protect them against forgery in a mesh-like system: see for example .onion addresses. Much of the way the net has evolved (for example, manufacturer-programmed MAC addresses) is a historical accident, including use of global registries. See Radia Perlman's talk on "Folklore of Network Protocols" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbZ5ruco0jM >> No organizations that compete for the award of rights of IP >> addresses. No organizations whose livelihood is based on the sale >> of global IP addresses. > > Why would states not compete for the award of rights of IP addresses > if they were organised globally? Why do you wish to get rid of the > RIRs? How do you think this relates to names, do you think that > global generic (as opposed to country) names are a bad idea or is > your proposal only for numbers? Is the (IAB/IETF >) IANA > RIR > LIR > user allocation pattern always going to exist? Fortunately I don't think states have yet tried to interfere with RIRs in the way they do with DNS, but that may have been simply that they are less visible to policy-makers, and RIRs may need protecting. There is no necessary relationship between ccTLDs and states, but states may feel a sense of "ownership" of related TLDs. The public [I]nternet is classically a set of federated services; but corporate, governmental and economic forces have in the 21st century tended to favour centralisation, with fully decentralised and P2P functions partly a reaction in the opposite direction. I'd suggest the theory and details are more worth raising with IETF/IRTF participants like those formalising .onion addresses, TRILL and decentralised protocols. You would first need interoperable specifications (or building on top of what we have) and then an economic or social mechanism to adopt the new system. Look at how long IPv6 is taking... in the meantime though, IMHO questions about ICANN and IANA need to remain high on civil society's agenda. -- All best wishes, Cedric Knight (GreenNet) From pwilson at apnic.net Sat Nov 28 08:21:29 2015 From: pwilson at apnic.net (Paul Wilson) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 23:21:29 +1000 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> Message-ID: For reference, here’s an article on this topic, written 10 years ago in response to an ITU proposal for geographic/nationalised management of IPv6 address space. http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_geography_of_internet_addressing Paul. On 27 Nov 2015, at 6:49, willi uebelherr wrote: > The decentralization of IP addresses. > > We need a completely self-organizing Internet. And this is possible > only through massive decentralization. We can look at the difficulties > at the beginning of the Internet with tolerance. They were mostly of a > technical nature. But today we have other conditions. And from these > other conditions arise other possibilities. > > It is about the IP address. It is necessary to ensure that the packets > find their direct route to their targets. The router work with > numbers. We humans with text. The content is the same. Only the > representation is different. > > The Internet, a transport system for digital data in packet form, > needs this destination address to forward the packets to their > destinations can. The packets include this destination. With that, the > packets are the instance to enable and orient the router. > > All transport systems operate on the basis of geographical processes. > We transport from position A to position B. Consider. The transport of > digital data They are comparable with boxes. In the case the data are. > They do not care. Outside sticking a piece of paper with the source > address, destination address and some information about the transport. > These boxes are being made from the transport routes such as the cars > and buses on the roads. > > Consider the transport of digital data. The IP packets are comparable > to cases in which the data are packed. But the data do not interest > us. Outside sticking a piece of paper with the source address, > destination address and some information about the transport. These > boxes flows over the transport routes such as the cars and buses on > the roads. > > At the branches we have to decide how to proceed. There are the > routers. They look at the paper and read the destination address. This > is converted to the geographical position and compared to the > geographical position of the router. The result is a directional angle > and the distance. And with that each router can immediately decide in > which direction it goes on. > > We have thus fulfilled the first requirement. The global part of the > IP address is always derived from the geographical position of the > local network. How we do this is an object of our global discussion > and cooperation based on the RFCs (Request for Comment). A very simple > way. > > The local part of the IP address is always self-determined in the > local network. We do not need to know the schema of resolution outside > of the local network. In the DNS request we also get this part. > > The decisive factor for this solution that we need in the future no > Internet Governance. No organizations that compete for the award of > rights of IP addresses. No organizations whose livelihood is based on > the sale of global IP addresses. > > With many greetings, willi > Coro, Venezuela > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC dg at apnic.net http://www.apnic.net @apnicdg From nashton at consensus.pro Sat Nov 28 08:37:20 2015 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 14:37:20 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: <56596F19.1010407@gn.apc.org> References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <6DD55BC7-2BBD-484E-BD1D-39124BDCACE6@difference.com.au> <56596F19.1010407@gn.apc.org> Message-ID: <1514e4fee80.2753.9387b8a9f30986f905fcc4cfa238b71f@consensus.pro> Good evening all, For what it is worth we have pretty profound issues in Internet policy right now which threaten the network as a globalised, interoperable construct. It seems to me not terribly useful to spend time discussing, let alone reinventing, something that is not only working, but working well. On 28 November 2015 10:08:41 Cedric Knight wrote: > Hi - my first post to bestbits list, cutting down on the cross-posting a > bit. > > On 28/11/15 06:18, David Cake wrote: >>> On 27 Nov 2015, at 4:49 AM, willi uebelherr wrote: >>> >>> The decentralization of IP addresses. >>> >>> We need a completely self-organizing Internet. And this is possible >>> only through massive decentralization. We can look at the >>> difficulties at the beginning of the Internet with tolerance. They >>> were mostly of a technical nature. But today we have other >>> conditions. And from these other conditions arise other >>> possibilities. > [snip] >>> The decisive factor for this solution that we need in the future no >>> Internet Governance. >> >> Systems that are geographically based, like the postal and phone >> systems, involve a great deal of governance. Just ask the ITU. The >> main difference is that it is largely done by states. Why would your >> proposal be different? > > Good question, but given the possibilities opened up by ICTs, would it > not be premature to assume that other models *cannot* exist, and that > managing an address space (or certification such as PKI) always has to > require any central or hierarchical co-ordination? There is often an > assumption that fully decentralised addressing does not scale as it may > require each node to store a full set of identifiers - however, that's > not so different from internet routing tables that consist of over half > a million IP prefixes. It may be possible to route globally unique > identifiers and protect them against forgery in a mesh-like system: see > for example .onion addresses. > > Much of the way the net has evolved (for example, > manufacturer-programmed MAC addresses) is a historical accident, > including use of global registries. See Radia Perlman's talk on > "Folklore of Network Protocols" at > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbZ5ruco0jM > >>> No organizations that compete for the award of rights of IP >>> addresses. No organizations whose livelihood is based on the sale >>> of global IP addresses. >> >> Why would states not compete for the award of rights of IP addresses >> if they were organised globally? Why do you wish to get rid of the >> RIRs? How do you think this relates to names, do you think that >> global generic (as opposed to country) names are a bad idea or is >> your proposal only for numbers? > > Is the (IAB/IETF >) IANA > RIR > LIR > user allocation pattern always > going to exist? Fortunately I don't think states have yet tried to > interfere with RIRs in the way they do with DNS, but that may have been > simply that they are less visible to policy-makers, and RIRs may need > protecting. There is no necessary relationship between ccTLDs and > states, but states may feel a sense of "ownership" of related TLDs. The > public [I]nternet is classically a set of federated services; but > corporate, governmental and economic forces have in the 21st century > tended to favour centralisation, with fully decentralised and P2P > functions partly a reaction in the opposite direction. > > I'd suggest the theory and details are more worth raising with IETF/IRTF > participants like those formalising .onion addresses, TRILL and > decentralised protocols. You would first need interoperable > specifications (or building on top of what we have) and then an economic > or social mechanism to adopt the new system. Look at how long IPv6 is > taking... in the meantime though, IMHO questions about ICANN and IANA > need to remain high on civil society's agenda. > > -- > All best wishes, > > Cedric Knight > (GreenNet) > > > > > ---------- > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Sat Nov 28 12:23:05 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 12:53:05 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> Message-ID: <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> Dear Paul, many thanks for your reference. For your constructive participation in this discussion. But i think, there are some basic differences. 1) An ISP oriented network is impossible. ISP's are only traders of transportcapacity. And no more. We do not need this parasitic space. 2) I speak about geografical addresses. You wrote: "In the early days of IP address management, until some time in the early 1990s, it was commonly assumed that the Internet's geography would follow that of the physical world. In some cases, large address blocks were set aside for entire countries...". But this is a very different thing. You speak about virtual address number blocks, that are oriented to any region. 3) you wrote: "Since their establishment, the RIRs have become the sole mechanism for distribution of IP address space to their users, namely ISPs and network providers, throughout the world. ..." You have a big confusion. The organisation, her name and identity, can never be the basic for our analysis. We have to look, what they do. We never need any form of address/name management, if we use a real physical object. And this is strong compatible with the needs for our telecommunication. People, real existing subjects, act. And not any virtual instances. 4) You use often the term network. A net is a very well defined geometrical structure. It is a recursive geometrical structure, where every nodes, that are part in this connection structure, create the connection to his neighbours. And only then, if the nodes do that, we have a net. In this time, the Net structure do not exist in the telecommunication. Independent of your attempt to explain the virtual action space of the telecommunication systems to the reality. In the telecommunication we have only bus and star topologies. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela Am 28/11/2015 um 08:51 a.m. schrieb Paul Wilson: > For reference, here’s an article on this topic, written 10 years ago in > response to an ITU proposal for geographic/nationalised management of > IPv6 address space. > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_geography_of_internet_addressing > > Paul. > > > > On 27 Nov 2015, at 6:49, willi uebelherr wrote: > >> The decentralization of IP addresses. >> >> ... From rysiek at hackerspace.pl Sat Nov 28 13:45:51 2015 From: rysiek at hackerspace.pl (rysiek) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:45:51 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] New article on Cybersecurity and Human Rights In-Reply-To: <0DCB063C-FB35-4856-B238-7D811F5829F8@difference.com.au> References: <56534B4C.9070101@digitaldissidents.org> <0DCB063C-FB35-4856-B238-7D811F5829F8@difference.com.au> Message-ID: <8156825.C1GPGXjgNV@lapuntu> Dnia wtorek, 24 listopada 2015 08:20:38 David Cake pisze: > Of course its not a new idea for people to be in control over their own data > - but I think Andrew and Lea make a valuable contribution here in > eloquently making the argument that privacy rights and being in control > over your own data is not just a right to be protected (that might then be > understood to sometimes be in conflict with national security), but rather > in the internet world of porous borders an absolutely intrinsic part of > national security. We need to strongly express the argument in the > cybersecurity debate that any proposal to weaken individual privacy and > security in the name of ‘national security’ (such as data retention or mass > surveillance proposals, and absolutely efforts to weaken access to > encryption or mandate ‘backdoors’) is misguided and actually weakens > national security in a very meaningful way. I find this text succint and very to the point here: https://nadim.computer/2015/11/23/on-encryption-and-terrorists.html The author is the original developer behind CryptoCat: https://crypto.cat/ -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 931 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: From dan.oppermann at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 15:39:58 2015 From: dan.oppermann at gmail.com (Daniel Oppermann) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 18:39:58 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] =?UTF-8?Q?GigaNet_Symposium_in_Jo=C3=A3o_Pessoa_on_Mon?= =?UTF-8?Q?day=2C_09_November?= Message-ID: Hi all, GigaNet is having its 10th Annual Symposium in João Pessoa, Brazil, on Monday 09 November 2015. And as it is a birthday event we are also going to celebrate it that night. Hope to see you there! http://giga-net.org/page/2015-annual-symposium http://sched.co/4bGt Best, Daniel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rysiek at hackerspace.pl Sat Nov 28 13:50:41 2015 From: rysiek at hackerspace.pl (rysiek) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:50:41 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] Zero rating and the silent voices In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2550613.UHOvPRjXJJ@lapuntu> Dnia poniedziałek, 23 listopada 2015 15:35:48 Jonathan Jacobs pisze: > Hi all, > > Just to let everyone know that we've just published an article by GPD's > Executive Director Andrew Puddephatt, entitled Zero rating and the silent > voices > s-on-igf-2015/> . I love this quote: “for Tier-2 city users [in India] who spend less than two hours a day online, over 90% of that time is spent on Facebook; in this case, will the demand for Facebook really fluctuate depending on whether it deploys zero-rating?” This is a perfectly good argument for Facebook to drop zero-rating altogether. Or do they have the data that say otherwise?.. -- Pozdrawiam, Michał "rysiek" Woźniak Zmieniam klucz GPG :: http://rys.io/pl/147 GPG Key Transition :: http://rys.io/en/147 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 931 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: From bzs at theworld.com Sat Nov 28 15:18:48 2015 From: bzs at theworld.com (bzs at theworld.com) Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2015 15:18:48 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] [discuss] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> Message-ID: <22106.3112.172334.848592@pcls8.std.com> What we need is to explore organizing DNS, DNSSEC, IPvX address allocation, and BGP (probably some other TLAs) around blockchain technologies using ECDSA for authentication and authorization so we can treat these spaces as permissionless distributed databases with policies implemented as self-executing smart contracts. Yes that paragraph makes perfect sense, agree or not. But maybe instead we can cure cancer with some sort of bottom-up multi-stakeholder policy development process. What can it possibly mean to base the identification of objects which have no physical presence anywhere using their geographical location? -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo* From jefsey at jefsey.com Sun Nov 29 02:19:30 2015 From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey) Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 08:19:30 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> Message-ID: >At 18:23 28/11/2015, willi uebelherr wrote: >>many thanks for your reference. For your constructive participation >>in this discussion. > >At 20:36 28/11/2015, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >Your texts are impossible to understand, and the little that is >understandable is hopelessly confused. Your proposal is "not even >false" (by which I mean it is not possible to make sense of it, and >then to determine if it's true or false.) Willi, This being said, having been in charge for several years (1982/1986) of the global DNIC based X.121 addressing implementation, I supported 10 years ago the ITU _investigation_ (it was not a proposition). Why? Because we will necessarily move into a more open world once the 1986-2013 "status-quo" culture has progressively unfrozen through experimentation and (now technically correct) "permissionless innovation". The difference between the "ITU/RIRs" period and the post ICANN leadership evolution should be the multiplication of registries (continents, nations, RFC 6852 global communities, ISO/IEC 11179, etc.) and types of numbering plans. The same as 15 years ago they documented why new TLDs would spoil the nets. At that time no one considered possibilities such as SixXS, nor an RFC 6852 pleading for the technology to be driven by markets economics, nor the IETF to consensually accepting to be bound to the ICANN "global community" and subject to NTIA review. Now, I suggest you at least read two RFCs: 1. RFC 1958 "architectural principles of the Internet". Its first section is named "Constat change". It starts stating: " In searching for Internet architectural principles, we must remember that technical change is continuous in the information technology industry. The Internet reflects this. ... Principles that seemed inviolable a few years ago are deprecated today. Principles that seem sacred today will be deprecated tomorrow. The principle of constant change is perhaps the only principle of the Internet that should survive indefinitely." 2. RFC 3439 states " The implication for carrier IP networks then, is that to be successful we must drive our architectures and designs toward the simplest possible solutions." jfc >Am 28/11/2015 um 08:51 a.m. schrieb Paul Wilson: >>For reference, here's an article on this topic, written 10 years ago in >>response to an ITU proposal for geographic/nationalised management of >>IPv6 address space. >> >>http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_geography_of_internet_addressing >> >>Paul. From lmcknigh at syr.edu Sun Nov 29 20:11:25 2015 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 01:11:25 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> , Message-ID: <1448845879579.75739@syr.edu> Hi Jean-Christophe , I appreciate your effort to summarize many conversations across many threads, from your point of view. But as to your interpretation that my +1 = 'very upset'; I beg to differ. I was merely agreeing with Stephane, and am not at all upset honestly. As to what is indeed ripe for further decentralisation in an age of Things and other Non-Person Entities with their own Internet addresses among other attributes, that is a better question; but still not quite on target I humbly suggest. We are nearing release of v0.4 of the Open Specifications Model, which is completely virtualized and hence decentralized by its nature from cloud to edge; that model incorporates - everything - at all OSI layers, physical or virtual; and beyond. Which exists now, or can exist in the future. v0.3 is here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274754770_Open_Specifications_Model_v0.3_Wireless_Grids_Internet_of_Things_Technical_Requirements Students, faculty and firms from every continent save Antarctica have contributed already, as have many governmental and community organizations. We are admittedly still far from v1.0, so plenty of time for folks to dive in and contribute in the Open Specification Model's formative phases. Some of you may recall we have shared every version from the beginning with the Internet Governance Caucus; and that this model builds on civil society values as exemplified by its incorporating the Charter on Internet Rights and Principles into v0.3. Open innovation communities - wherever - we anticipate will (continue) to contribute to its further evolution, just as for example IGF and its dynamic coalitions on Internet Rights and Principles, and on Internet of Things, are being - synchronized/incorporated into the model itself. Without asking Wolfgang;s or anyone's permission. : ) In sum, I am not at all upset, just +1'd Stephane's attempt to - politely educate - others who imho are asking off-target questions displaying to be frank, their misunderstanding. Assuming the target is open/permissionless Internet innovation, wherever, more or less same as it ever was, but now with many many more contributing; that is in that sense further decetralized. But this time around with hopefully better security and privacy for data & things to keep bad bots and other malicious actors from stealing your bits, identity, or other resources; and with civil society values baked into the model itself. To be clear, what I am suggesting is you, and others are free to add on to the Open Specifications Model further features and attributes as you wish, without needing to wade into the spheres or domains of IETF, ICANN or RIR allocation processes, since after all who really cares about autonomous systems and networks when their key feature from an Internet point of view is that they -- recognize and pass bits as the sender requested? If interested in further information on autonomous systems, this article from Geoff Huston does a good job explaining the mechanics and references the relevant RFCs if further study of that aspect of the Intenet architecture is of interest. Happy to elaborate further, or provide further links, if so requested. In any case when v0.4 is good to go, we will pass links to that along with 5 or 6 use cases, and open code, to the IGC list; should anyone desire to build one's own open cyberphysical Internet of ....without asking anyone's permission. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org on behalf of Jean-Christophe Nothias Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 12:59 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jefsey Cc: willi uebelherr; Paul Wilson; 1net.org discuss; 0net.org discuss; BestBits; APC forum; IUF brasil; WSF discuss; Nw Labour discuss Subject: Re: [governance] The decentralization of IP addresses Dear lists, A view among others. I note that this topic of 'the decentralization of IP addresses', even though a few have mocked the questioner and the question, is raising some debate. I was asking myself why do we suddenly have some activity as regards to Willy's wishes and questioning? Let us see what this thread has to say so far: - Suresh very briefly summarized Willy's views by calling for an end to confusion between TCP/IP and the Postal service. A sarcasm to the least. Too bad, Suresh doesn't mention the fact that ITU is handling a non geographical space of futurist and strategic importance i.e. the Space, and its many satellites - another technology inherited from the Telegraph century?! ITU the organization helping dummies inhabiting the atmosphere to communicate with us, the grounded. - David gave some more detailed thoughts about "understanding names and numbers". Saying that names are abstractions is fine, but short of clarity; writing that 'systems geographically based involve a great deal of governance' is also confusing. It is not clear if David meant that today IPs are living their life with no governance at all, or if a different model for handling IPs would be such a burden on economic or technological grounds. Could David provide an analysis comparing the two systems with pro and cons, data and figures? David recommended to ask ITU for feedbacks on regional and national governance. Another taste for sarcasm it seems. Acknowledging that Willy's ideas were raising 'lot of questions', David noted that 'many of us would disagree with quite a few of Willy's assumptions as both misguided in their intent, and based on some fairly basic misunderstandings'. That makes a lot of assumptions for David to counter Willy's assumptions. - Suresh joined again to highlight David's mention of ITU: 'such proposals have been floating around ITU circles for a great many years". Probably another terrible plot by the villains in Geneva! - Cedric asked: '...would it not be premature to assume other models cannot exist, and that managing an address space (or certification such as PKI) always has to require any central or hierarchical co-ordination?' - Chantal provided a link to Louis's work, getting us back to the origins and basics of transmitting data in a network of networks. Still working today. - Paul provided a reference - not mentioning that it was a link to a post he wrote - challenging ITU's work about IPs; to no one's surprise he advocated against it or any attempt to change the system. The post is very long but it doesn't necessarily mean that Paul is right. Paul emphasized the absence of geography for IPs, even though the network of networks is made of networks geographically established in national boundaries and under national jurisdictions, something that hasn't destroyed the idea of INTER-connected NETworks - to the contrary. Maybe I should simply write that the Internet is an international network of national networks, therefore with a lot of geographic national bounds and boundaries. When Paul concludes his blog he notes: 'The structure of today's Internet is a geography of independent networks around the world' - he omits to indicate the national specification and very nature of these networks - 'with transparent borders allowing traffic to flow freely between any pair of locations'. Such narrative should sounds like poetry to many techos, - and to me as well - and its allegoric style should not forbid us to challenge what seems to be well established (see jfc's email for that). Indeed there are many ways to flow freely between any pair of locations" wIth or without the current DNS, or within the current DNS. Here again a lot of assumptions. - By then Nick argued that they were other profound issues 'threatening the network', and therefore, we should all stop discussing Willy's question and views. Obviously Nick's comment does not exactly bring substance to the thread. On a personal note, I am sure everyone on these lists is quite able to decide whether or not to enter any debate, to their best judgement. Calling for an end to a debate (which is having a few guns exchanging shots) is relatively surprising for someone from the business industry so prompt to call for protection of freedom of expression, human rights, and who has seen himself as the next ICANN's CEO with some self confidence. (I know this a bad habit among self-(s)elected folks). By the way, how would you label folks calling for stopping debating? Democrats, yes that must the right word. - 'srs' came in with an interesting IP technologist's quote: 'IP addresses, though randomly allocated, could easily be listed on a per country basis by the Agencies. Existing filtering system does this with zero need to reallocate anything...' - Stéphane who's used to demonstrate his googling of RFCs had this to ask to the lists: "When are we too polite?" His answer was compelling: his message was saying something like be gross and mean. Stéphane didn't give any RFC number to support his contra 'too polite' stance. - Barry would call his great sense of humor to keep the debate open, ironically calling for a multistakeholder bottom-up trick to solve the issue. Just need to read Barry once to make sure you have respect for geography. - Lee was happy with Stéphane's contra 'too polite' stance and used a '+1'. Both must be very upset with the question. - Lately, 'jfc' would somehow support Stéphane's critic of Willy's clarity, but would be kind enough to clearly support what he sees as a decent ITU investigation. 'jfc' provided two excellent RFC references to support his support. I see a couple of interesting points being made here. First, could people provide a link to ITU investigation, and a link to a source describing the current governance for IPs. At least for those who are not so acquainted. Second, I wonder why Willy and his question create such a fuss. Many hypothesis. One seems to be the role of the 'decentralizing' idea in the questioning. In fact, most pro status quo folks (aligned with multistakeholderists) are professing an already decentralized Internet. 'Therefore how could we decentralize an already decentralized system?', they seem to ask. According to them, this doesn't make sense, and must be defeated as pure non sense. So maybe the question is some sort of major embarras de principe. Maybe then the basic solution is to kill the question for it would be insane, confusing, impossible, unreadable, part of another ITU temptation to grab power - please feel free to be unpolite - ... The question seems unbearable. When it is not, at least on technical and public policy grounds. But of course, there are other hypothesis. Third, challenging the Internet architecture seems to be a red line, something that no multistakeholder/status quo champion could ever discuss, debate, think of. They should think twice. And not because of the ITU, but because of the US obstructive stance, and because technology calls for innovation and disruption. (Thanks to jfc for the RFCs on this). IPs can obviously be distributed on a national basis - maybe not the best system - but that is doable. Of course, an NGO located in one of these evil, rogues or villain states will put its digital content behind IPs located out of their unfriendly homeland. Here, we are talking Internet architecture, the political and societal impacts it has, and the rules it obeys to, and not just its beauty code. Of course, we have many pending Internet governance issues, something that will be demonstrated sometime in NY in December, but let's stop talking about 'digital Human Rights' for a sec. (Alec Ross once said to me that they didn't exist, as they were invented to serve a greater purpose: the US interests) There is an IP/root-zone/DNS governing model behind the current status quo. For the time being, it leads us to IETF/IAB for the most part, and to RFCs for the historic part. We all know that IANA's transfer is a kind of écran de fumée when the real power lies beyond it. Giving IANA from ICANN under NTIA/DoC/USG to ICANN without NTIA/DoC/USG won't make a difference. A true decentralization (in terms of coordination) would create a new set of governance, not just bring one to a space that used to live without one centralized governing set of rules. I am convinced that technology would be happy to adapt, as a neutral thing - it loves to be challenged anyway. Some will even argue that IANA and ICANN are not critical resources when it comes to Internet architecture. I tend to agree, as ICANN/IANA are valets to the architects, or guardian of the current DNS aspect of the architecture. The network of networks is fragmented by nature, but it is/looks a coherent and fluid space - thanks to Louis and followers for making this possible. As regards to the current DNS, things could be set otherwise, still coherent and fluid, two qualities that are not enough for us who ask for more social justice, democratic regulation, transparency... Tomorrow we could have a multi-rooted Internet. We (the users as the real Internet community) would simply have different concierges: each user would be offered a choice at any time to chose his/her concierge (Emilio Iccano, Pedro Oproot, Marcello NameSpace, Willy Uncleario...). Browsers would allow users to chose which root concierge they want to use at anytime. Of course, concierge with special connection to mass surveillance paranoids might lose the favor of the public. If the NSA would catch a few nihilists, that would greatly help to justify the billion they cost to the US taxpayer. Soon some geeks/startups/companies will make profits out of such ideas. We don't need ICANN to live and navigate the Internet. ICANN is only one out of many solutions. ICANN's power comes from the fact that there is promiscuity and connivence between the commercial and security US players. ICANN has a monopolistic nature because some commercial giants, and security folks need it. Of course, ICANN et al claim that any competitor would disrupt and fragment the Internet. Which is of course a fairytale. Maybe we shouldn't bother as over the next decade some geeks will ruin the DNS as we know it. The ones telling us that we need to fight any attempt to broke what works so well, simply omit to tell us that the Internet architecture can be different and more consistent with all of what many of us are advocating here, with more responsibility, with more competition, more innovation, more distributive power at local and community level, with greater respect of our Rights. The overall vision of an Internet being un-fragmented is propagated by the ones who wish to protect giants and tyrants's sovereignty on markets and people. The digital economic war now raging over the planet will only drive to the dismantlement of the existing fortress, de facto monopole, tyranny of a few. The US policy, strictly applied by his pet followers (Sweden, UK, Japan, Canada, and the commonwealth - love this name), is there to preserve its interests. Decentralization is needed (a real one) in a revised global legal framework to protect it, and the people's rights and their own conception of what are the new Commons. Such a legal framework, an international law would hold part of it as far as governments are concerned, would distribute more responsibility, competition, better protect rights, and it would also drive economic wealth in a more distributed way, not just to the big players imposing their rules (not to confuse with regulation). Since it exists, Google has greatly contributed to kill pluralism in the media landscape. Who cares? Thanks to its financial torque, it has bought for itself intellectual rights to part of the human legacy in health, literature, science... Who cares? The game is to capture audiences, one way or another, as famously and appropriately put by Susan Crawford. This means more centralization, more concentration. This is not what the founders of Internet dreamt of - I am referring to the academic folks who invented it, with no multistakeholder process behind them, and before the USG took control in 1998. Instead the US should start setting a competitive digital world with more root concierges (for more TLDs). That would demonstrate and protect a diversity and plurality of languages, culture, traditions, media, markets, still under interoperable norms and regulations (sorry I could not avoid to use that ugly word). A multi-rooted Internet would offer more search engines, neutral and less commercially biased ones. A multi-rooted approach would also be complementary to a multipolar, fluid and decentralized Internet. A multi-rooted approach would help achieve an alternative Internet with an immediate more balanced governance, with interoperability and competitive approaches, with no tyrants to dominate others, in the interest of users around the planet. IPs are IPS, and content are located at IPs. So asking to different concierge would fragment nothing, except the current monopoles. The surveillance and commercial ones. Something we would love the US to be the champions of. Something for a New Frontiers president. (Someone is telling me that the guy exists but that he was assassinated by his fellow countrymen - the country of the Free with the record number of assassinated presidents). So let's wait for the next New Frontiers president to emerge. In the US, or anywhere else. Or let's use what we already have at hand. So indeed, it seems that behind the "decentralization of", there is a lot to be concerned with. The decentralization question is helping to deconstruct the fairytale of a decentralized and ungovernable Internet that we have been given for granted over the last 17 years since 1998. JC Le 29 nov. 2015 à 08:19, Jefsey a écrit : At 18:23 28/11/2015, willi uebelherr wrote: many thanks for your reference. For your constructive participation in this discussion. At 20:36 28/11/2015, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: Your texts are impossible to understand, and the little that is understandable is hopelessly confused. Your proposal is "not even false" (by which I mean it is not possible to make sense of it, and then to determine if it's true or false.) Willi, This being said, having been in charge for several years (1982/1986) of the global DNIC based X.121 addressing implementation, I supported 10 years ago the ITU _investigation_ (it was not a proposition). Why? Because we will necessarily move into a more open world once the 1986-2013 "status-quo" culture has progressively unfrozen through experimentation and (now technically correct) "permissionless innovation". The difference between the "ITU/RIRs" period and the post ICANN leadership evolution should be the multiplication of registries (continents, nations, RFC 6852 global communities, ISO/IEC 11179, etc.) and types of numbering plans. The same as 15 years ago they documented why new TLDs would spoil the nets. At that time no one considered possibilities such as SixXS, nor an RFC 6852 pleading for the technology to be driven by markets economics, nor the IETF to consensually accepting to be bound to the ICANN "global community" and subject to NTIA review. Now, I suggest you at least read two RFCs: 1. RFC 1958 "architectural principles of the Internet". Its first section is named "Constat change". It starts stating: " In searching for Internet architectural principles, we must remember that technical change is continuous in the information technology industry. The Internet reflects this. ... Principles that seemed inviolable a few years ago are deprecated today. Principles that seem sacred today will be deprecated tomorrow. The principle of constant change is perhaps the only principle of the Internet that should survive indefinitely." 2. RFC 3439 states " The implication for carrier IP networks then, is that to be successful we must drive our architectures and designs toward the simplest possible solutions." jfc Am 28/11/2015 um 08:51 a.m. schrieb Paul Wilson: For reference, here's an article on this topic, written 10 years ago in response to an ITU proposal for geographic/nationalised management of IPv6 address space. http://www.circleid.com/posts/the_geography_of_internet_addressing Paul. ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dave at difference.com.au Sun Nov 29 21:52:24 2015 From: dave at difference.com.au (David Cake) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 10:52:24 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> Message-ID: <798313CC-727D-42B2-820F-B5C84835B97E@difference.com.au> > On 30 Nov 2015, at 1:59 AM, Jean-Christophe Nothias wrote: > - David gave some more detailed thoughts about "understanding names and numbers". Saying that names are abstractions is fine, but short of clarity; writing that 'systems geographically based involve a great deal of governance' is also confusing. It is not clear if David meant that today IPs are living their life with no governance at all, or if a different model for handling IPs would be such a burden on economic or technological grounds. Why would you take a comment out of context, and then complain that out of context it isn’t clear what I meant? I said that 'systems geographically based involve a great deal of governance’ as a straight rejoinder to the idea that we should go for the geographic proposal because ‘we need in the future no Internet Governance’. > Could David provide an analysis comparing the two systems with pro and cons, data and figures? No, because one is a purely notional proposal lacking any detail, but I can definitely say that the geographical organisation of the telephone and postal systems has not resulted in them being free of the need for governance. Rather, the ITU and IPU seem to spend a lot of time on governance of those systems, and then there is a lot of governance at the local level in addition. > David recommended to ask ITU for feedbacks on regional and national governance. Another taste for sarcasm it seems. I would have characterised it as ‘dismissively pointing out the obvious’, but you can call it sarcasm if you want. It remains both true and obvious that communications systems that are organised on a geographic basis still seem to involve a great deal of governance at both the global and national level. Cheers David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 455 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Mon Nov 30 18:37:05 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 19:07:05 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] The decentralization of IP addresses In-Reply-To: References: <56577058.1000008@riseup.net> <5659E2F9.5040707@riseup.net> Message-ID: <565CDDA1.3050905@riseup.net> My dear Jefsey, i am so thankful for your answer. Independent of our differences, always you answer in a very constructive form. I read this RFC's. Yes, a very open space we find there. And i do not understand, why Brian Carpenter, the editor of the RFC 1958, attacked me so strong on the 1net.org list. You act like Wolfgang Kleinwaechter. We have differences, but we search the truth, the "simplicity" in the internet. And this is my experience in my life. People with a strong base in her knowledge are always able to reflect different opinions and methods. I thank also very much Jean-Christophe Nothias for his reflection of this discussion. I will you and all open friends in this lists explain a little bit, why i forced this discussion from May 2014 until today. And i will continue this discussion later. Since 5 years i live in Latin America. 2 years in Venezuela. Then 3 years i travel in latin America from Mexico to Chile/Argentina. Only Uruguay and Paraguay i don't visit. Therefore, i know the reality in Latin America. My experience correlate directly with 2 persons: Andre Gunder Frank: "Latin America, the development of underdevelopment". Eduardo Galeano: "The underdevelopment is not a step to development. The underdevelopment is a result of the development of others". Now, i come back to Venezuela 4 weeks before. Friends invited me to come to Coro in Falcon in the North of Venezuela. The situation is the same like 3 years ago. But we have an important change: The destruction of the illusion of stability based on the extractivism. The people now understand, that they have to change his way, if they want to have a future. We act on the base of the visionary part of Señor Hugo Chavez. On the 3 pole: - Independencia o Nada - Poder Popular o Nada - Comunas o Nada "o Nada" means "or Nothing". The independence is the base in this 3-pole. Because the independence rests always in the people, in the persons, our focus is the support for the people local to unfold her capacity in the theoretical and practical requirements. The political independence in principle is based on the independence in the economy. And the economy is based on the technical infrastructures and the independence in the technology. And because we speak about Venezuela, a network of distributed local communities, every form of independence is based on the local independence for this. This is the concept of Comunas, based on the Paris Comune and our history. The concrete entrypoint for us is the open and free internet for the free access to free knowledge and communication. We use it for all forms of telecommunication: page access, audio and video streaming. The result is an unique transportsystem for digital data for all types of information structures. The transport is organized in pakets without any "virtual connection". We do not need the TCP protocol. We connect directly to Louis Pouzin. Clear, in this time with analog systems and many different specification, the paket transfer of digital data with error checking was not possible. With mechanical relais and analog amplifiers you never can do this. I understand. And Vint Cerf, i think, understand it also. But what situation we have here? The telecommunication system is totally controlled from external private companies. Internal, the private and state companies are only departments of the external groups. Never you can find a University in Latin America, where the students can study. And never you find an environment to study the basics for telecommunication, computer architecture, material physic for the digital and analog moduls. You find consumer temples, training centers for using and service (exchange of parts). No more. The biggest blockades for the development comes from inside. The state. The organisation of Egoism and Parasitism. Clear, all state construction on our planet are parasitic. They use the biggest part of the ressources and create nothing. Only stupidness and destruction. And all state institution work for the rich private groups and never for the people. We start here with the internet. It is the most important instrument for the development of our independence. The development of our technical infrastructure and the independence in the technology. The internet is the space for a big challenge: The development, construction and fabrication of the technical components. And immediatly, we come to all spheres and technical requirements in our life. But with this base of technical infrastructures for the internet we have the bases in all other spaces. Here in Falcon, the second step is the stability of the water systems. And we come directly to the desalination of ocean water. And also for that we need the global cooperation in the free technology. The reforestration of all dry regions on our planet is for me the second main task for the people. The first is the dissolving of all military and paramilitary structures and infrastructures. The free technology is free for use and participate for all people on our planet. And we have a clear base: "global thinking, local doing" and "knowledge is always world heritage". We never accept any form of private ownership of common ressources. And we never use it. We ignore it. This is the background, why we can start with a radical reflection on the existing systems. Our focus is the telecommunication, the communication over geografical and time distances. Therefore, we can look for, what we need. Maybe, therefore so many people in the IGF lists don't understand all this. They live in a virtual space, based on the international slavery systems, and not in the reality. And mostly, they don't know what is going on in the hardware. I thank you and our friends very much for your time, for your patience. I hope, in the next time, we can start in the space of our global free technology network. We have to end the dogmatic with the wave and dipol theories for energy transmission, We have to go from Heinrich Hertz to Niclas Tesla and Werner Heisenberg. We have to find the way for high speed data transport based on low energy transmission. I don't like this stupid idea of glas and plastic fibre cable. Because we have to connect all local networks in the communities with her neighbors, the using of cable is a big nonsense. You see, we don't discuss the higher levels of protocols. We start on the base. And free spoken: The OSI model is nonsense. In our transport system, we speak about Tb-lines and not Kb, Mb or Gb-lines. And for the router, we need embedded control with passive cooling. Furnace in the refrigerator we don't need. Based on the geografical position the routing is very simple. And we have no administration of numbers. Dear Jefsey, we are always open for this discussion in any form. I like very much the exchange of opinion and ideas with people with different thinking. And i hope, that any time we can create the "World Internet Forum". An environment, where the people on our planet can interact based on equality and cooperation for our common needs. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela Am 29/11/2015 um 02:49 a.m. schrieb Jefsey: > >> At 18:23 28/11/2015, willi uebelherr wrote: >>> many thanks for your reference. For your constructive participation >>> in this discussion. >> >> At 20:36 28/11/2015, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: >> Your texts are impossible to understand, and the little that is >> understandable is hopelessly confused. Your proposal is "not even >> false" (by which I mean it is not possible to make sense of it, and >> then to determine if it's true or false.) > > Willi, > > This being said, having been in charge for several years (1982/1986) > of the global DNIC based X.121 addressing implementation, I supported > 10 years ago the ITU _investigation_ (it was not a proposition). > > Why? Because we will necessarily move into a more open world once the > 1986-2013 "status-quo" culture has progressively unfrozen through > experimentation and (now technically correct) "permissionless innovation". > > The difference between the "ITU/RIRs" period and the post ICANN > leadership evolution should be the multiplication of registries > (continents, nations, RFC 6852 global communities, ISO/IEC 11179, > etc.) and types of numbering plans. > > The same as 15 years ago they documented why new TLDs would spoil the > nets. At that time no one considered possibilities such as SixXS, nor > an RFC 6852 pleading for the technology to be driven by markets > economics, nor the IETF to consensually accepting to be bound to the > ICANN "global community" and subject to NTIA review. > > Now, I suggest you at least read two RFCs: > > 1. RFC 1958 "architectural principles of the Internet". Its first > section is named "Constat change". It starts stating: " In searching > for Internet architectural principles, we must remember that technical > change is continuous in the information technology industry. The > Internet reflects this. ... Principles that seemed inviolable a few > years ago are deprecated today. Principles that seem sacred today will > be deprecated tomorrow. The principle of constant change is perhaps > the only principle of the Internet that should survive indefinitely." > > 2. RFC 3439 states " The implication for carrier IP networks then, is > that to be successful we must drive our architectures and designs > toward the simplest possible solutions." > > > jfc > Am 29/11/2015 um 01:29 p.m. schrieb Jean-Christophe Nothias: > Dear lists, > > A view among others. > > I note that this topic of 'the decentralization of IP addresses', even though a few have mocked the questioner and the question, is raising some debate. I was asking myself why do we suddenly have some activity as regards to Willy's wishes and questioning? > > Let us see what this thread has to say so far: > - Suresh very briefly summarized Willy's views by calling for an end to confusion between TCP/IP and the Postal service. A sarcasm to the least. Too bad, Suresh doesn't mention the fact that ITU is handling a non geographical space of futurist and strategic importance i.e. the Space, and its many satellites - another technology inherited from the Telegraph century?! ITU the organization helping dummies inhabiting the atmosphere to communicate with us, the grounded. > - David gave some more detailed thoughts about "understanding names and numbers". Saying that names are abstractions is fine, but short of clarity; writing that 'systems geographically based involve a great deal of governance' is also confusing. It is not clear if David meant that today IPs are living their life with no governance at all, or if a different model for handling IPs would be such a burden on economic or technological grounds. Could David provide an analysis comparing the two systems with pro and cons, data and figures? David recommended to ask ITU for feedbacks on regional and national governance. Another taste for sarcasm it seems. Acknowledging that Willy's ideas were raising 'lot of questions', David noted that 'many of us would disagree with quite a few of Willy's assumptions as both misguided in their intent, and based on some fairly basic misunderstandings'. That makes a lot of assumptions for David to counter Willy's assumptions. > - Suresh joined again to highlight David's mention of ITU: 'such proposals have been floating around ITU circles for a great many years". Probably another terrible plot by the villains in Geneva! > - Cedric asked: '...would it not be premature to assume other models cannot exist, and that managing an address space (or certification such as PKI) always has to require any central or hierarchical co-ordination?' > - Chantal provided a link to Louis's work, getting us back to the origins and basics of transmitting data in a network of networks. Still working today. > - Paul provided a reference - not mentioning that it was a link to a post he wrote - challenging ITU's work about IPs; to no one's surprise he advocated against it or any attempt to change the system. The post is very long but it doesn't necessarily mean that Paul is right. Paul emphasized the absence of geography for IPs, even though the network of networks is made of networks geographically established in national boundaries and under national jurisdictions, something that hasn't destroyed the idea of INTER-connected NETworks - to the contrary. Maybe I should simply write that the Internet is an international network of national networks, therefore with a lot of geographic national bounds and boundaries. When Paul concludes his blog he notes: 'The structure of today's Internet is a geography of independent networks around the world' - he omits to indicate the national specification and very nature of these networks - 'with transparent borders allowing traffic to flow freely between any pair of locations'. Such narrative should sounds like poetry to many techos, - and to me as well - and its allegoric style should not forbid us to challenge what seems to be well established (see jfc's email for that). Indeed there are many ways to flow freely between any pair of locations" wIth or without the current DNS, or within the current DNS. Here again a lot of assumptions. > - By then Nick argued that they were other profound issues 'threatening the network', and therefore, we should all stop discussing Willy's question and views. Obviously Nick's comment does not exactly bring substance to the thread. On a personal note, I am sure everyone on these lists is quite able to decide whether or not to enter any debate, to their best judgement. Calling for an end to a debate (which is having a few guns exchanging shots) is relatively surprising for someone from the business industry so prompt to call for protection of freedom of expression, human rights, and who has seen himself as the next ICANN's CEO with some self confidence. (I know this a bad habit among self-(s)elected folks). By the way, how would you label folks calling for stopping debating? Democrats, yes that must the right word. > - 'srs' came in with an interesting IP technologist's quote: 'IP addresses, though randomly allocated, could easily be listed on a per country basis by the Agencies. Existing filtering system does this with zero need to reallocate anything...' > - Stéphane who's used to demonstrate his googling of RFCs had this to ask to the lists: "When are we too polite?" His answer was compelling: his message was saying something like be gross and mean. Stéphane didn't give any RFC number to support his contra 'too polite' stance. > - Barry would call his great sense of humor to keep the debate open, ironically calling for a multistakeholder bottom-up trick to solve the issue. Just need to read Barry once to make sure you have respect for geography. > - Lee was happy with Stéphane's contra 'too polite' stance and used a '+1'. Both must be very upset with the question. > - Lately, 'jfc' would somehow support Stéphane's critic of Willy's clarity, but would be kind enough to clearly support what he sees as a decent ITU investigation. 'jfc' provided two excellent RFC references to support his support. > > I see a couple of interesting points being made here. > > First, could people provide a link to ITU investigation, and a link to a source describing the current governance for IPs. At least for those who are not so acquainted. > > Second, I wonder why Willy and his question create such a fuss. Many hypothesis. One seems to be the role of the 'decentralizing' idea in the questioning. In fact, most pro status quo folks (aligned with multistakeholderists) are professing an already decentralized Internet. 'Therefore how could we decentralize an already decentralized system?', they seem to ask. According to them, this doesn't make sense, and must be defeated as pure non sense. So maybe the question is some sort of major embarras de principe. Maybe then the basic solution is to kill the question for it would be insane, confusing, impossible, unreadable, part of another ITU temptation to grab power - please feel free to be unpolite - ... The question seems unbearable. When it is not, at least on technical and public policy grounds. But of course, there are other hypothesis. > > Third, challenging the Internet architecture seems to be a red line, something that no multistakeholder/status quo champion could ever discuss, debate, think of. They should think twice. And not because of the ITU, but because of the US obstructive stance, and because technology calls for innovation and disruption. (Thanks to jfc for the RFCs on this). IPs can obviously be distributed on a national basis - maybe not the best system - but that is doable. Of course, an NGO located in one of these evil, rogues or villain states will put its digital content behind IPs located out of their unfriendly homeland. > > Here, we are talking Internet architecture, the political and societal impacts it has, and the rules it obeys to, and not just its beauty code. Of course, we have many pending Internet governance issues, something that will be demonstrated sometime in NY in December, but let's stop talking about 'digital Human Rights' for a sec. (Alec Ross once said to me that they didn't exist, as they were invented to serve a greater purpose: the US interests) > > There is an IP/root-zone/DNS governing model behind the current status quo. For the time being, it leads us to IETF/IAB for the most part, and to RFCs for the historic part. We all know that IANA's transfer is a kind of écran de fumée when the real power lies beyond it. Giving IANA from ICANN under NTIA/DoC/USG to ICANN without NTIA/DoC/USG won't make a difference. A true decentralization (in terms of coordination) would create a new set of governance, not just bring one to a space that used to live without one centralized governing set of rules. I am convinced that technology would be happy to adapt, as a neutral thing - it loves to be challenged anyway. Some will even argue that IANA and ICANN are not critical resources when it comes to Internet architecture. I tend to agree, as ICANN/IANA are valets to the architects, or guardian of the current DNS aspect of the architecture. The network of networks is fragmented by nature, but it is/looks a coherent and fluid space - thanks to Louis and followers for making this possible. As regards to the current DNS, things could be set otherwise, still coherent and fluid, two qualities that are not enough for us who ask for more social justice, democratic regulation, transparency... Tomorrow we could have a multi-rooted Internet. We (the users as the real Internet community) would simply have different concierges: each user would be offered a choice at any time to chose his/her concierge (Emilio Iccano, Pedro Oproot, Marcello NameSpace, Willy Uncleario...). Browsers would allow users to chose which root concierge they want to use at anytime. Of course, concierge with special connection to mass surveillance paranoids might lose the favor of the public. If the NSA would catch a few nihilists, that would greatly help to justify the billion they cost to the US taxpayer. Soon some geeks/startups/companies will make profits out of such ideas. We don't need ICANN to live and navigate the Internet. ICANN is only one out of many solutions. ICANN's power comes from the fact that there is promiscuity and connivence between the commercial and security US players. ICANN has a monopolistic nature because some commercial giants, and security folks need it. Of course, ICANN et al claim that any competitor would disrupt and fragment the Internet. Which is of course a fairytale. Maybe we shouldn't bother as over the next decade some geeks will ruin the DNS as we know it. > > The ones telling us that we need to fight any attempt to broke what works so well, simply omit to tell us that the Internet architecture can be different and more consistent with all of what many of us are advocating here, with more responsibility, with more competition, more innovation, more distributive power at local and community level, with greater respect of our Rights. The overall vision of an Internet being un-fragmented is propagated by the ones who wish to protect giants and tyrants's sovereignty on markets and people. The digital economic war now raging over the planet will only drive to the dismantlement of the existing fortress, de facto monopole, tyranny of a few. The US policy, strictly applied by his pet followers (Sweden, UK, Japan, Canada, and the commonwealth - love this name), is there to preserve its interests. > > Decentralization is needed (a real one) in a revised global legal framework to protect it, and the people's rights and their own conception of what are the new Commons. Such a legal framework, an international law would hold part of it as far as governments are concerned, would distribute more responsibility, competition, better protect rights, and it would also drive economic wealth in a more distributed way, not just to the big players imposing their rules (not to confuse with regulation). Since it exists, Google has greatly contributed to kill pluralism in the media landscape. Who cares? Thanks to its financial torque, it has bought for itself intellectual rights to part of the human legacy in health, literature, science... Who cares? The game is to capture audiences, one way or another, as famously and appropriately put by Susan Crawford. This means more centralization, more concentration. This is not what the founders of Internet dreamt of - I am referring to the academic folks who invented it, with no multistakeholder process behind them, and before the USG took control in 1998. > > Instead the US should start setting a competitive digital world with more root concierges (for more TLDs). That would demonstrate and protect a diversity and plurality of languages, culture, traditions, media, markets, still under interoperable norms and regulations (sorry I could not avoid to use that ugly word). A multi-rooted Internet would offer more search engines, neutral and less commercially biased ones. A multi-rooted approach would also be complementary to a multipolar, fluid and decentralized Internet. A multi-rooted approach would help achieve an alternative Internet with an immediate more balanced governance, with interoperability and competitive approaches, with no tyrants to dominate others, in the interest of users around the planet. IPs are IPS, and content are located at IPs. So asking to different concierge would fragment nothing, except the current monopoles. The surveillance and commercial ones. Something we would love the US to be the champions of. Something for a New Frontiers president. (Someone is telling me that the guy exists but that he was assassinated by his fellow countrymen - the country of the Free with the record number of assassinated presidents). So let's wait for the next New Frontiers president to emerge. In the US, or anywhere else. Or let's use what we already have at hand. > > So indeed, it seems that behind the "decentralization of", there is a lot to be concerned with. > > The decentralization question is helping to deconstruct the fairytale of a decentralized and ungovernable Internet that we have been given for granted over the last 17 years since 1998. > > JC > From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Mon Nov 30 23:09:00 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 23:09:00 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] IN SOME HOURS FROM NOW - CALL ON GLOBAL CONNECT Message-ID: Dear all, I just want to make sure you all have the information on this handy for tomorrow morning. Best, C On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Carolina Rossini < carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote: > Call information confirmed > > > December 1st at 9:30amEST > > US calls: +1 877-336-1839 > All other international calls: +1 636-651-0008 > > Access Code: 8542435 > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Carolina Rossini < > carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Sorry for cross-post, but it is a holiday week in some parts of the world. >> So I am in my lazy/slow mode. ;-) And please, share with your contacts. >> >> *I - What this email is about: PUT IN YOUR CALENDARS * >> >> This is an email to invite you all for a conference call with the US >> State Department on the Global Connect Initiative. They reached out to a >> couple of CS folks to make themselves available to discuss the initiative >> with CS and be available to address any questions any of you might have. *The >> call - details still to be confirmed - will be held on December 1st. *Manu >> Bhardwaj (bhardwajm at state.gov) is one of the magician who is now moving >> forward with the effort and who is the core contact on this, if you need >> it. >> >> *II - Global Connect:* >> >> As some of you might know and might actually be engaged with, the Sate >> Department launched a cross-agency initiative called Global Connect. which >> will include some events in NY, during the UNGA meeting this December. >> Based on the last information I've known of, they already have many >> supports and expression of support from countries around the world - >> including a bunch in Africa and Asia - and also many of the companies that, >> in a way or another, are involved in providing services and products for >> access. Over 20 NGOs supported the initiative during its launch, in NY, >> including Alliance for Affordable Internet (part of the Web Foundation), >> PK, AccessNow and others from the Global South. International >> organizations, including the World Bank, are also involved. >> >> Expression of support by Best Bits community - >> http://bestbits.net/global-connect-initiative/ >> >> >> And example of a company's support: >> http://www.itic.org/news-events/news-releases/tech-indusetry-releases-statements-lauding-state-department-s-global-connect-initiative >> >> >> Launch event webcast: >> http://webtv.un.org/watch/development-in-the-digital-age-high-level-panel-discussion/4513663507001 >> >> >> *III - Core Principles* >> >> The core principles of this initiative are: >> >> 1) Countries integrate Internet connectivity as a key part of their >> national development strategy and budget process and consult with all >> stakeholders in doing so; >> >> 2) International financial institutions and international development >> organizations prioritize digital access, including in the projects they >> support; >> >> 3) All stakeholders promote the linkage between the use of technology, >> expression, transparency and innovation; and the overall social, economic, >> and political benefits reaped from connectivity; >> >> 4) All stakeholders promote dialogue and action on how to harness, >> deploy, and enable innovative technologies to support quality, affordable >> and sustainable connectivity for the unconnected, particularly in >> power-deficient communities. >> >> *IV - New York in December * >> >> On December 16th, the US will host a invitation-only event mostly with >> the launch partners and some new countries that are joining the initiative. >> It seems that, du to the lack of space in the venue they secured, this will >> not be a open event. BUT, the State department is interested in hosting a >> event with CS that will be in NY for the UNGA meeting. I do not have the >> details for now. We all hope to hear more soon. (note - I will NOT be in >> NY, but I hope many of you will and will try to check this out). >> >> *V - After New York > Washington in April 2016 * >> >> To advance these goals, the State Department will host a high-level >> conference in Washington in mid-April, likely on the margins of the >> Bank/Fund Spring meetings, that aims to showcase policies and innovative >> public and private approaches to expand global connectivity, to encourage >> collaboration among stakeholders to increase Internet availability and >> access, and to gather commitments in support of the Global Connect >> objectives. >> >> *VI - And * >> >> As soon as I learn more about this, I will be here sharing with you. >> Other should feel free to jump in if they have more information. And feel >> free to reach out to Manu directly if you or your organization want to get >> more involved. >> >> Best, C >> >> -- >> *Carolina Rossini * >> *Vice President, International Policy* >> *Public Knowledge* >> *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * >> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini >> >> > > > -- > > *Carolina Rossini * > *Vice President, International Policy* > *Public Knowledge* > *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * > + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini > > -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From seth.p.johnson at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 21:26:32 2015 From: seth.p.johnson at gmail.com (Seth Johnson) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 21:26:32 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] What Intergovernmental Authority Lets You Do Message-ID: A clean anti-GPL in TPP's Article 14.7, using intergovernmental authority untrammeled by the legal traditions we the people(s) have established for ourselves. No using the statutory force of copyright to keep code free; instead you may negotiate those terms through commercially negotiated contracts. (from the A2K list) http://www.mfat.govt.nz/…/14.%20Electronic%20Commerce%20Cha… Article 14.17: Source Code 1. No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such software, in its territory. 2. For the purposes of this Article, software subject to paragraph 1 is limited to mass-market software or products containing such software and does not include software used for critical infrastructure. 3. Nothing in this Article shall preclude: (a) the inclusion or implementation of terms and conditions related to the provision of source code in commercially negotiated contracts; or (b) a Party from requiring the modification of source code of software necessary for that software to comply with laws or regulations which are not inconsistent with this Agreement. 4. This Article shall not be construed to affect requirements that relate to patent applications or granted patents, including any orders made by a judicial authority in relation to patent disputes, subject to safeguards against unauthorised disclosure under the law or practice of a Party. From seth.p.johnson at gmail.com Thu Nov 5 21:27:57 2015 From: seth.p.johnson at gmail.com (Seth Johnson) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2015 21:27:57 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] What Intergovernmental Authority Lets You Do In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Seth Johnson wrote: > A clean anti-GPL in TPP's Article 14.7, using intergovernmental > authority untrammeled by the legal traditions we the people(s) have > established for ourselves. > > No using the statutory force of copyright to keep code free; instead > you may negotiate those terms through commercially negotiated > contracts. > > (from the A2K list) Fixed URL: http://www.mfat.govt.nz/downloads/trade-agreement/transpacific/TPP-text/14.%20Electronic%20Commerce%20Chapter.pdf > Article 14.17: Source Code > > 1. No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of > software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, > distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such > software, in its territory. > > 2. For the purposes of this Article, software subject to paragraph 1 is > limited to mass-market software or products containing such software and > does not include software used for critical infrastructure. > > 3. Nothing in this Article shall preclude: (a) the inclusion or > implementation of terms and conditions related to the provision of source > code in commercially negotiated contracts; or (b) a Party from requiring > the modification of source code of software necessary for that software to > comply with laws or regulations which are not inconsistent with this > Agreement. > > 4. This Article shall not be construed to affect requirements that relate > to patent applications or granted patents, including any orders made by a > judicial authority in relation to patent disputes, subject to safeguards > against unauthorised disclosure under the law or practice of a Party. From ca at cafonso.ca Thu Nov 5 21:56:28 2015 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos Afonso) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 00:56:28 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] IGF 2015 - roundtable on spectrum allocations Message-ID: <563C16DC.4010702@cafonso.ca> [apologies for possible duplications] IGF 2015 – Roundtable 188 Spectrum allocations: challenges & opportunities at the edge When: November 10th, 11:00 - 12:30 (*) Where: IGF Workshop Room 1 The organization should enable facilities for remote participation for those who cannot go to João Pessoa. The roundtable is co-organized by Nupef Institute and CGI.br. What are the topics of this dialogue on the subject? Recent advances in digital radio technologies and the transition (already carried out or soon to take place depending on the country) to digital TV open significant opportunities for local governments, local entrepreneurs, communities and movements to create innovative applications at the edge of the network. Of special interest to our dialogue are the following topics: - Monitoring of real/effective use of spectrum at the local level; - Opportunities and challenges dervied from of the global transition to digital TV, in relation to community use of spectrum in the VHF/UHF bands relocated or released by this transition; - Regulatory and legislative processes that can affect various forms of spectrum use (light licensing, shared spectrum, secondary use) regarding local entrepreneurs, communities and local governments, in light of recent advances in cognitive radio technologies. The table will be open to different points of view related to these matters. We will minimize the initial presentations to spare more time for dialogue. We will have up to six initial presentations of no more than seven minutes each: - A representative of academia (Dr. Catherine Middleton, Ryerson University, Canada) - Up to three representatives of regulatory agencies (to be confirmed) - A representative of civil society (Professor Adriano Belisario, Brazil) - A representative of the business sector with a vision of local services (Steve Song, Village Telco, South Africa / USA) The moderator will be Maximiliano Martinhão, from the Brazil's Ministry of Communications and an expert in wireless technologies, who will make a brief preamble. The total number of presentations should not go beyond 45 minutes, leaving 45 minutes for dialogue between attendees. Participation of members of regulatory agencies may be difficult by the fact that the ITU has already started (on Nov.02) the World Radiocommunication Conference, which will last for almost a month. We are trying our best to minimize this problem. Fraternal regards Carlos A. Afonso rapporteur Nupef -- www.nupef.org.br ---------- (*) Note on Brazilian summer time Since October 19th, 2015, Brazil's official time for Southern, Southeastern and Center-West states is summer time -- clocks have advanced one hour. This *does not* apply to Norhteastern and Northern states, like Paraiba. So, now when it is 12:00 noon in Brasilia, it is 11:00 AM in João Pessoa. -- Carlos A. Afonso Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br CGI.br - http://cgi.br GPG 0x9EE8F8E3 Fingerprint EB2C 8F4B 1C68 8BB7 B6EC 9413 1FE5 1BB0 9EE8 F8E3 From anja at internetdemocracy.in Sun Nov 1 01:05:11 2015 From: anja at internetdemocracy.in (Anja Kovacs) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 11:35:11 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Fabulous choices! Congratulations to both, I too am proud and happy to be represented by you. Warmly, Anja On 1 November 2015 at 09:29, Mike Baak wrote: > I see arguments for both sides. Usually, the opening ceremony is the > event regarded as the primary event to set up the whole tone of the meeting > and send out powerful message. However, if CS people are going to be > presented for this 2015 IGF's closing ceremony (and I assume CS ppl will > not make speeches during the opening ceremony), then strategically it'd be > better to have a Brazilian at the closing ceremony to tie the CS's > arguments into the Brazilian national situation. > > And it also depends on the local culture, I guess. > > > Thank you, > Michael Baak > > International Policy Fellow, Public Knowledge > J.D., Cornell Law School > > On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > >> Hi Carolina, >> >> why would the closing ceremony be the better choice? Isn't better for >> Joana to speak at the opening ceremony when national politicians and the >> press are around? >> >> Jeanette >> >> >> Am 31.10.15 um 18:31 schrieb Carolina Rossini: >> >>> Good that you sent an updated bio Jo, I was about to do that when I saw >>> Ian's email. >>> >>> I am very happy about the nominations, but I would invert the order of >>> possible. Having a Brazilian at the end, as we had Grace and Burcu as CS >>> for closing ceremony, is VERY important politically. >>> >>> Not just for CS, but actually more as a opportunity to have the closing >>> speech also refer to national issues and ask specific commitments from >>> the Brazilian policy makers there. As Joana is incredible aware, since >>> she is deeply involved in the discussions, folks are trying to >>> puncture Marco Civil and cut back on other digital rights in Brazil... >>> We - the digital rights community - lost a lot of attention due to all >>> the political corruption that has take over all the media attention. >>> >>> We need to have Joana - as a Brasilian - putting the "country" against >>> the wall in front of everybody. And I feel the closing ceremony is >>> better for that purpose. >>> >>> I am saying all this without having spoken with Joana. So, I am not sure >>> if she is available. >>> >>> But I wanted to make sure to leave my opinion on this issue. >>> >>> C >>> >>> On Friday, October 30, 2015, >> > wrote: >>> >>> Thanks, Ian and everyone! >>> >>> I cannot express how honored I'm for this nomination. I hope I can >>> respond to the task with the bright it entails. >>> >>> As soon as nomination is confirmed I will share a pad for people to >>> bring inputs. Will already be dreaming with some insights. >>> >>> Just a correction in my institutional presentation as I'm not CTS >>> for more then 1 and half year now :): >>> >>> I'm founder director and creative chaos catalyst of Coding Rights, a >>> women lead think-and-do tank with the mission to bring hackers, >>> geeks, artists, researchers and activists together to protect, >>> promote and mainstream digital rights and empower women on ICTs. >>> More on @codingrights or codingrights.org >>> (still temporary work in progress) >>> >>> Thank you once again and have safe travels to João Pessoa. We will >>> be waiting for you all to cheer with caipirinhas or fresh coconut >>> water. >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Joana >>> >>> On 30 Oct 2015 17:36, Lea Kaspar >> > wrote: >>> >>> Congratulations to both, proud to be represented by these women. >>> >>> Many thanks to the CSCG for their work - excellent choices. >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> Lea >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Ian Peter >>> >> > wrote: >>> >>> Below are the two nominations from Civil Society >>> Coordination Group for speakers for this years IGF opening >>> and closing ceremonies. They were chosen from a field of 20 >>> names submitted from various civil society coalitions, and >>> have been forwarded to the IGF Secretariat. I must say that >>> any of the 20 names submitted could have represented us >>> admirably, and that it was a tough decision for the CSCG >>> members to come up with 2 names. >>> Joana Varon (Brazil) – opening ceremony – >>> joana at varonferraz.com >>> Nadine Moawad (Lebanon) – closing ceremony – >>> nadine at apcwomen.org >>> For those who don’t know them, >>> Joana Varon Ferraz is a researcher and project coordinator >>> at the Centre for Technology and Society from Fundação >>> Getulio Vargas in Rio de Janeiro >>> Nadine Moawad is a Lebanese feminist activist and >>> grasssroots worker who leads Association for Progressive >>> Communication (APC)'s sexual >>> rights work. >>> We commend them both as informed excellent communicators to >>> represent civil society. They have both been informed of >>> their nominations. >>> Ian Peter (Independent Chair, Civil Society Coordination >>> Group) >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>> >> ');>. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> /Carolina Rossini / >>> /Vice President, International Policy/ >>> *Public Knowledge* >>> _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_ >>> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >>> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >>> >>> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Dr. Anja Kovacs The Internet Democracy Project +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs www.internetdemocracy.in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joana at varonferraz.com Fri Nov 6 00:19:38 2015 From: joana at varonferraz.com (joana at varonferraz.com) Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 03:19:38 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] IGF 2015 - roundtable on spectrum allocations In-Reply-To: <563C16DC.4010702@cafonso.ca> References: <563C16DC.4010702@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <5a2ec1b4-0e0e-497a-9a77-d4aae2557738@varonferraz.com> Very important debate. Happy that .br government is attending. Have you seen this crazy resilient, mutating virus app: "The self-replicating smartphone app that’s ready for the apocalypse – and the censors" ...software that has genuine ‘survival skills’, and which can effectively replace infrastructure to keep relatively widespread groups connected, and – in the case where the oppression is political rather than natural – to diffuse ‘dissident’ messaging so widely that it cannot be repressed or erased by controlling regimes.... ... The source code for the app is available via GitHub, and the report notes that it is the first self-compiling Android app capable of replicating itself and mutating its source rather than its compiled code.... Source: https://thestack.com/world/2015/11/05/the-self-replicating-smartphone-app-thats-ready-for-the-apocalypse-and-the-censors/ Rock on, Belisário! Will try to show up! X Joana On 5 Nov 2015 23:56, Carlos Afonso wrote: [apologies for possible duplications] IGF 2015 – Roundtable 188 Spectrum allocations: challenges & opportunities at the edge When: November 10th, 11:00 - 12:30 (*) Where: IGF Workshop Room 1 The organization should enable facilities for remote participation for those who cannot go to João Pessoa. The roundtable is co-organized by Nupef Institute and CGI.br. What are the topics of this dialogue on the subject? Recent advances in digital radio technologies and the transition (already carried out or soon to take place depending on the country) to digital TV open significant opportunities for local governments, local entrepreneurs, communities and movements to create innovative applications at the edge of the network. Of special interest to our dialogue are the following topics: - Monitoring of real/effective use of spectrum at the local level; - Opportunities and challenges dervied from of the global transition to digital TV, in relation to community use of spectrum in the VHF/UHF bands relocated or released by this transition; - Regulatory and legislative processes that can affect various forms of spectrum use (light licensing, shared spectrum, secondary use) regarding local entrepreneurs, communities and local governments, in light of recent advances in cognitive radio technologies. The table will be open to different points of view related to these matters. We will minimize the initial presentations to spare more time for dialogue. We will have up to six initial presentations of no more than seven minutes each: - A representative of academia (Dr. Catherine Middleton, Ryerson University, Canada) - Up to three representatives of regulatory agencies (to be confirmed) - A representative of civil society (Professor Adriano Belisario, Brazil) - A representative of the business sector with a vision of local services (Steve Song, Village Telco, South Africa / USA) The moderator will be Maximiliano Martinhão, from the Brazil's Ministry of Communications and an expert in wireless technologies, who will make a brief preamble. The total number of presentations should not go beyond 45 minutes, leaving 45 minutes for dialogue between attendees. Participation of members of regulatory agencies may be difficult by the fact that the ITU has already started (on Nov.02) the World Radiocommunication Conference, which will last for almost a month. We are trying our best to minimize this problem. Fraternal regards Carlos A. Afonso rapporteur Nupef -- www.nupef.org.br ---------- (*) Note on Brazilian summer time Since October 19th, 2015, Brazil's official time for Southern, Southeastern and Center-West states is summer time -- clocks have advanced one hour. This *does not* apply to Norhteastern and Northern states, like Paraiba. So, now when it is 12:00 noon in Brasilia, it is 11:00 AM in João Pessoa. -- Carlos A. Afonso Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br CGI.br - http://cgi.br GPG 0x9EE8F8E3 Fingerprint EB2C 8F4B 1C68 8BB7 B6EC 9413 1FE5 1BB0 9EE8 F8E3 ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Fri Nov 6 04:44:50 2015 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 20:44:50 +1100 Subject: [bestbits] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 Message-ID: Dear Civil Society members, (with apologies for cross posting) Below is a letter just sent by CSCG to the organisers of the WSIS speaker selection process, a matter which has been under discussion on various lists. (and as a result much discussion within CSCG) This is also to let you know that CSCG has also decided to endorse Ian Peter and Lea Kaspar to represent its interests on the selection committee, and they will be forwarding details in due course. We acknowledge and respect the decision of JNC not to participate in the process as outlined by DESA, and hence in the selection of candidates to be endorsed by CSCG for their proposed selection committee. We imagine that some discussions will take place in forthcoming days as regards the issues raised in our letter. We will keep you informed of any major developments. LETTER FOLLOWS Dear Co-facilitators of WSIS + 10 process, We are writing to you on behalf of the Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG), a “coalition of coalitions” working actively on internet governance issues. Our member coalitions (Association for Progressive Communications, Best Bits Coalition, Internet Governance Caucus, Just Net Coalition, and Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN) extends to some thousands of individual members and hundreds of civil society organisations working actively on internet governance issues. Many have been involved with the WSIS process since its inception. Firstly, we wish to commend you for your efforts to include voices of non-governmental actors in the WSIS + 10 process. However, we would like to raise a serious concern about one part of the process, whereby selection of civil society speakers for various events appears to be being done by a selection committee which includes representatives of other non-governmental stakeholder groups. You will understand that it is of utmost importance for maintaining the independence of civil society that its representatives are chosen by civil society alone, and having other stakeholder representatives as part of a selection committee for civil society representation, or as final arbiters of our representation, is problematic for us. Indeed, in the evolution of the multistakeholder model of internet governance, this was made quite clear in the Netmundial Outcomes Declaration. I quote: "Stakeholder representatives appointed to multistakeholder Internet governance processes should be selected through open, democratic, and transparent processes. Different stakeholder groups should self - manage their processes based on inclusive, publicly known, well defined and accountable mechanisms." In accordance with this principle, CSCG has established its own internal selection processes, which can be found at http://www.internetgov-cs.org/procedures. These are transparent processes, accepted and adopted by a wide range of civil society organisations, and used effectively in the past for selection of civil society representatives for e.g. IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group, Speakers for IGF Opening and Closing ceremonies, The Netmundial meeting, and various other UN and international events where CS speakers and representatives have been required. These procedures take into account gender and geographic balance as a central matter of our determinations. Since some deadlines are quite close with respect to the currently announced process, we request your urgent intervention in this regard. Our proposal is that each stakeholder group choose its own speaker representatives and put these forward. We do realise that increasing - both as widening and as deepening - civil society engagement with the UN is a challenging and complex process, and we salute your pioneering efforts in this regard. The Internet Governance Civil Society Co-ordination Group (CSCG) remains available to assist you in this matter. Sincerely Ian Peter Independent Chair, Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group Endorsed by CSCG Members: Chat Garcia Ramilo, Association for Progressive Communications Jeremy Malcolm, Best Bits Coalition Deirdre Williams and Analia Apsis, Internet Governance Caucus, Norbert Bollow, Just Net Coalition Robin Gross, Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mariliamaciel at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 05:25:48 2015 From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 08:25:48 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] Invitation: Privacy under mass surveillance-IGF day zero and CTS-FGV agenda Message-ID: Dear colleagues, The Center for Technology and Society of the Getulio Vargas Foundation (CTS-FGV) and the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP), would like to invite you to the event “Privacy under mass surveillance: a multi-stakeholder international challenge” to be held on November 9th from 15:00 to 18:00 in João Pessoa, Brazil, during the “Day Zero” of the Internet Governance Forum. Attached you will find the full agenda of activities of CTS-FGV at the IGF 2015, with further details on this event. We would also like to call your attention to two thematically related sessions: WS 114 on "Implementing Core Principles in the Digital Age" (10 Nov, 11:00-12:30 workshop room 10) and OHCHR/CoE open forum on the right to privacy in the digital age (11 Nov, 16:30-17:30, workshop room 3). Looking forward to meet many of you in João Pessoa or through e-participation. Best wishes, Marília ​ ​ -- *Marília Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: (cover) igf2015 Leaflet CTSIGF final 4.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 328244 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: igf2015 Leaflet CTSIGF final 4.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 603786 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IGF2015 flyer CTS-FGV.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 132401 bytes Desc: not available URL: From valeriab at apc.org Fri Nov 6 10:26:10 2015 From: valeriab at apc.org (Valeria Betancourt) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 10:26:10 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] APC priorities for IGF 2015 Message-ID: <563CC692.4070406@apc.org> Dear all, Attached is the document of APC's priorities for the IGF 2015. As compendium of our activities for in João Pessoa is available at https://www.apc.org/en/node/21198/ Best, Valeria -- Valeria Betancourt Directora / Manager Programa de Políticas de Information y Comunicación / Communication and Information Policy Programme Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones / Association for Progressive Communications, APC http://www.apc.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: APC IGF 2015 priorities.pdf Type: video/x-fl Size: 186921 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lmcknigh at syr.edu Fri Nov 6 11:09:42 2015 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 16:09:42 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <1446826181855.50896@syr.edu> +1 ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org on behalf of Mueller, Milton L Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 10:09 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Ian Peter; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; forum at justnetcoalition.org Subject: RE: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 Nice job, support the content of the letter --MM From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ian Peter Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:45 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; forum at justnetcoalition.org Subject: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 Dear Civil Society members, (with apologies for cross posting) Below is a letter just sent by CSCG to the organisers of the WSIS speaker selection process, a matter which has been under discussion on various lists. (and as a result much discussion within CSCG) This is also to let you know that CSCG has also decided to endorse Ian Peter and Lea Kaspar to represent its interests on the selection committee, and they will be forwarding details in due course. We acknowledge and respect the decision of JNC not to participate in the process as outlined by DESA, and hence in the selection of candidates to be endorsed by CSCG for their proposed selection committee. We imagine that some discussions will take place in forthcoming days as regards the issues raised in our letter. We will keep you informed of any major developments. LETTER FOLLOWS Dear Co-facilitators of WSIS + 10 process, We are writing to you on behalf of the Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG), a “coalition of coalitions” working actively on internet governance issues. Our member coalitions (Association for Progressive Communications, Best Bits Coalition, Internet Governance Caucus, Just Net Coalition, and Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN) extends to some thousands of individual members and hundreds of civil society organisations working actively on internet governance issues. Many have been involved with the WSIS process since its inception. Firstly, we wish to commend you for your efforts to include voices of non-governmental actors in the WSIS + 10 process. However, we would like to raise a serious concern about one part of the process, whereby selection of civil society speakers for various events appears to be being done by a selection committee which includes representatives of other non-governmental stakeholder groups. You will understand that it is of utmost importance for maintaining the independence of civil society that its representatives are chosen by civil society alone, and having other stakeholder representatives as part of a selection committee for civil society representation, or as final arbiters of our representation, is problematic for us. Indeed, in the evolution of the multistakeholder model of internet governance, this was made quite clear in the Netmundial Outcomes Declaration. I quote: "Stakeholder representatives appointed to multistakeholder Internet governance processes should be selected through open, democratic, and transparent processes. Different stakeholder groups should self - manage their processes based on inclusive, publicly known, well defined and accountable mechanisms." In accordance with this principle, CSCG has established its own internal selection processes, which can be found at http://www.internetgov-cs.org/procedures. These are transparent processes, accepted and adopted by a wide range of civil society organisations, and used effectively in the past for selection of civil society representatives for e.g. IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group, Speakers for IGF Opening and Closing ceremonies, The Netmundial meeting, and various other UN and international events where CS speakers and representatives have been required. These procedures take into account gender and geographic balance as a central matter of our determinations. Since some deadlines are quite close with respect to the currently announced process, we request your urgent intervention in this regard. Our proposal is that each stakeholder group choose its own speaker representatives and put these forward. We do realise that increasing - both as widening and as deepening - civil society engagement with the UN is a challenging and complex process, and we salute your pioneering efforts in this regard. The Internet Governance Civil Society Co-ordination Group (CSCG) remains available to assist you in this matter. Sincerely Ian Peter Independent Chair, Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group Endorsed by CSCG Members: Chat Garcia Ramilo, Association for Progressive Communications Jeremy Malcolm, Best Bits Coalition Deirdre Williams and Analia Apsis, Internet Governance Caucus, Norbert Bollow, Just Net Coalition Robin Gross, Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aditi at gp-digital.org Fri Nov 6 15:20:53 2015 From: aditi at gp-digital.org (Aditi Gupta) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 20:20:53 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Invitation to the Freedom Online Coalition Open Forum at the IGF (Day Three, 12:00-13:00) Message-ID: Dear colleagues, On behalf of the *Freedom Online Coalition* *,* you are cordially invited to join us at the *FOC Open Forum * on IGF Day Three , taking place from 12:00 to 13:00 on Thursday , November 12 , in workshop room 3. For more details, please see below. We hope to see you there! On behalf of the FOC Support Unit, Aditi ----------- *Freedom Online Coalition Open Forum* *12 November 2015 – 12:00-13:00* *Workshop Room 3* The Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) is a partnership of governments who abide by the principle that “human rights apply online as they do offline”, and are committed to working together to support and protect Internet freedoms worldwide. The FOC was established at the inaugural Freedom Online Conference in The Hague in 2011. Today, the Coalition has 28 members, spanning from Africa to Asia, Europe, the Americas, and the Middle East. By joining the Coalition, its members commit to upholding and advancing the Coalition’s shared goals and values, as stated in the FOC Founding Declaration (Freedom Online: Joint Action for Free Expression on the Internet ), the Nairobi Terms of Reference , and theTallinn Agenda . Coalition members will give updates on the work of the Coalition since IGF Istanbul and the activities of the three working groups (WG 1 – An Internet Free and Secure ; WG 2 - Digital Development and Openness and WG 3 – Privacy and Transparency Online ) on key issues of concern to Internet freedom. At this IGF Open Forum, we invite the IGF community to engage in a Q&A with FOC member states, the FOC Secretariat and the co-chairs of the Working Groups on Coalition activities. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Fri Nov 6 15:40:00 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 20:40:00 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] WSIS+10 New Draft OUT [Fwd: [IGFmaglist] WSIS + 10 HL review by the UNGA draft Outcome Document] Message-ID: Dear all, Please find attached the new draft of the WSIS outcome document, published by the UNGA Co-facilitators earlier today. Some highlights include: - a new, separate section on human rights; - continued references to the need to address cyber-terrorism/cyber-threats; - more government-centric view of IG (internet governance is now framed as needing to be multilateral/ transparent/ democratic rather than open/ inclusive/ transparent as in previous draft); - IGF renewal recommended for a further 10 years (albeit contingent on improvements reported on by the CSTD); - enhanced cooperation follow-up via a special session of 71 UNGA, possibly to consider progress on setting up an intergovernmental mechanism; - review High Level Event scheduled for 2025. In addition, you might note in the covering note that this draft will next be formally discussed by governments in a closed session at the UNGA on November 19-20 and 24-25... All the more important to make our views known at the IGF! Interested to hear others' views. Best, Lea ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Date: Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 3:34 PM Subject: [IGFmaglist] WSIS + 10 HL review by the UNGA draft Outcome Document To: "igfmaglist at intgovforum.org" Dear MAG members, I would like to share the draft Outcome Document of the WSIS + 10 High Level review by the UN GA event that was released by the co-facilitators of the process. The draft Document reflects many proposals that were expressed during the discussion of the Zero draft. I hope the min session on WSIS + 10 will contribute to further fine-tuning of the text. Pls feel free to disseminate the draft as widely as necessary. Best regards JK Sent from Surface _______________________________________________ Igfmaglist mailing list Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: World Summit on Information Society - 4 November 2015.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 524325 bytes Desc: not available URL: From andersj at elon.edu Fri Nov 6 16:35:50 2015 From: andersj at elon.edu (Janna Anderson) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 21:35:50 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Invitation_to_Jo=E3o_Pessoa_IGF_video_i?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?nterviews?= Message-ID: Invitation for all Global IGF 2015 on-site participants who will be in João Pessoa, please share with all who may have an interest: [cid:2F476871-126E-42E2-AB32-5C5E43E60A1C] Please share your insights with young people from the global-good project Imagining the Internet at IGF 2015 in João Pessoa, Brazil You are invited to visit Nov. 9-13 at the conference venue with a team of Elon University students who are asking IGF participants to share their hopes for the future of the Internet in brief video interviews. Imagining the Internet is a Webby Award-winning, non-profit, civil society project. We ask people to share their views in order to inform policy development, to expose issues, potential impacts and challenges and to tell the story of the Internet's evolution. You will be asked these questions: First: Who are you? (Your name, work title/affiliation, the country in which you live, and your IGF stakeholder group.) 1) Hope? What is your greatest hope for the future of the Global Internet Governance Forum - what should it ideally accomplish for the world? 2) The Top Internet Issues? What are the most important issues that must be addressed in order to assure the best future for the Internet and all people? (What are the most-heard buzzwords/controversial subjects that should be considered?) 3) Biggest Threat to Freedom and Trust Online? Internet experts say one of the biggest threats to the Internet is the ways in which businesses and governments seek to control people's online interactions. What do you see as the greatest threat to achieving the most positive future for the global Internet? 4) Connecting the last billion? In previous years, the IGF discussion has been about connecting the "next billion" people. What specific steps are being taken today to connect the last billion - those who are most difficult to reach and serve? 5) Internet in a nutshell - Using just a few words - in just five seconds or less - VERY briefly describe the future of the Internet. The interviews will be posted during the event at http://www.imaginingtheinternet.org and at https://www.youtube.com/user/ImaginingtheInternet under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license. Leaders of the on-site interview team are Dr. Kenn Gaither, tgaither at elon.edu, a professor at Elon University, and Aaron Moger, amoger at elon.edu, a video producer at Elon. Students participating as interviewers are Michael Bodley, Leena Dahal, Gary Grumbach, Jacob LaPlante, Jackie Pascale and Paige Pauroso. To see a similar previous project, take a look at our interviews at WTPF and WSIS 2013: http://www.elon.edu/e-web/imagining/event-coverage/wtpf_wsis_2013/default.xhtml The director of Imagining the Internet is Professor Janna Anderson of Elon, andersj at elon.edu. www.imaginingtheinternet.org - Please share your wisdom! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2F476871-126E-42E2-AB32-5C5E43E60A1C.png Type: image/png Size: 16549 bytes Desc: 2F476871-126E-42E2-AB32-5C5E43E60A1C.png URL: From seth.p.johnson at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 21:47:15 2015 From: seth.p.johnson at gmail.com (Seth Johnson) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 21:47:15 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] What Intergovernmental Authority Lets You Do In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Correction: I had said this was an anti-GPL. In fact, it only says (in effect) that signatory countries can't require device code to be available -- not that their copyright laws can't enable the GPL. If it had said their copyright law could not allow that, that would have done it. But signatory countries are the Party in question, and their passing a law of a certain type is all it addresses. A statutory requirement to make the code available is disallowed, not anything that would be the subject of a license like the GPL. On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:26 PM, Seth Johnson wrote: > A clean anti-GPL in TPP's Article 14.7, using intergovernmental > authority untrammeled by the legal traditions we the people(s) have > established for ourselves. > > No using the statutory force of copyright to keep code free; instead > you may negotiate those terms through commercially negotiated > contracts. > > (from the A2K list) > > http://www.mfat.govt.nz/…/14.%20Electronic%20Commerce%20Cha… > > Article 14.17: Source Code > > 1. No Party shall require the transfer of, or access to, source code of > software owned by a person of another Party, as a condition for the import, > distribution, sale or use of such software, or of products containing such > software, in its territory. > > 2. For the purposes of this Article, software subject to paragraph 1 is > limited to mass-market software or products containing such software and > does not include software used for critical infrastructure. > > 3. Nothing in this Article shall preclude: (a) the inclusion or > implementation of terms and conditions related to the provision of source > code in commercially negotiated contracts; or (b) a Party from requiring > the modification of source code of software necessary for that software to > comply with laws or regulations which are not inconsistent with this > Agreement. > > 4. This Article shall not be construed to affect requirements that relate > to patent applications or granted patents, including any orders made by a > judicial authority in relation to patent disputes, subject to safeguards > against unauthorised disclosure under the law or practice of a Party. From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Fri Nov 6 22:54:09 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 22:54:09 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Invitation to the Freedom Online Coalition Open Forum at the IGF (Day Three, 12:00-13:00) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry to miss this, but me and a bunch of folks from LatAm will join me and others for a session/meeting on cybersecurity strategies for the region. On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Aditi Gupta wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > On behalf of the *Freedom Online Coalition* > *,* you are cordially invited to > join us at the *FOC Open Forum * on IGF Day Three , > taking place from 12:00 to 13:00 on Thursday , > November 12 , in workshop room 3. For more details, > please see below. > > > We hope to see you there! > > > On behalf of the FOC Support Unit, > > > Aditi > > > ----------- > > > *Freedom Online Coalition Open Forum* > > > > *12 November 2015 – 12:00-13:00* > > > > *Workshop Room 3* > > > The Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) > is a partnership of governments who abide by the principle that “human > rights apply online as they do offline”, and are committed to working > together to support and protect Internet freedoms worldwide. The FOC was > established at the inaugural Freedom Online Conference in The Hague in > 2011. Today, the Coalition has 28 members, spanning from Africa to Asia, > Europe, the Americas, and the Middle East. > > By joining the Coalition, its members commit to upholding and advancing > the Coalition’s shared goals and values, as stated in the FOC Founding > Declaration (Freedom Online: Joint Action for Free Expression on the > Internet > ), > the Nairobi Terms of Reference > , > and theTallinn Agenda > > . > > Coalition members will give updates on the work of the Coalition since IGF > Istanbul and the activities of the three working groups (WG 1 – An > Internet Free and Secure > > ; WG 2 - Digital Development and Openness > > and WG 3 – Privacy and Transparency Online > ) > on key issues of concern to Internet freedom. > > At this IGF Open Forum, we invite the IGF community to engage in a Q&A > with FOC member states, the FOC Secretariat and the co-chairs of the > Working Groups on Coalition activities. > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vkapiyo at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 12:50:17 2015 From: vkapiyo at gmail.com (Victor Kapiyo) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 20:50:17 +0300 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Congratulations to both of you and I'm sure you'll represent us well Regards Victor On 1 Nov 2015 06:05, "Anja Kovacs" wrote: > Fabulous choices! Congratulations to both, I too am proud and happy to be > represented by you. > > Warmly, > Anja > > On 1 November 2015 at 09:29, Mike Baak wrote: > >> I see arguments for both sides. Usually, the opening ceremony is the >> event regarded as the primary event to set up the whole tone of the meeting >> and send out powerful message. However, if CS people are going to be >> presented for this 2015 IGF's closing ceremony (and I assume CS ppl will >> not make speeches during the opening ceremony), then strategically it'd be >> better to have a Brazilian at the closing ceremony to tie the CS's >> arguments into the Brazilian national situation. >> >> And it also depends on the local culture, I guess. >> >> >> Thank you, >> Michael Baak >> >> International Policy Fellow, Public Knowledge >> J.D., Cornell Law School >> >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 6:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Carolina, >>> >>> why would the closing ceremony be the better choice? Isn't better for >>> Joana to speak at the opening ceremony when national politicians and the >>> press are around? >>> >>> Jeanette >>> >>> >>> Am 31.10.15 um 18:31 schrieb Carolina Rossini: >>> >>>> Good that you sent an updated bio Jo, I was about to do that when I saw >>>> Ian's email. >>>> >>>> I am very happy about the nominations, but I would invert the order of >>>> possible. Having a Brazilian at the end, as we had Grace and Burcu as CS >>>> for closing ceremony, is VERY important politically. >>>> >>>> Not just for CS, but actually more as a opportunity to have the closing >>>> speech also refer to national issues and ask specific commitments from >>>> the Brazilian policy makers there. As Joana is incredible aware, since >>>> she is deeply involved in the discussions, folks are trying to >>>> puncture Marco Civil and cut back on other digital rights in Brazil... >>>> We - the digital rights community - lost a lot of attention due to all >>>> the political corruption that has take over all the media attention. >>>> >>>> We need to have Joana - as a Brasilian - putting the "country" against >>>> the wall in front of everybody. And I feel the closing ceremony is >>>> better for that purpose. >>>> >>>> I am saying all this without having spoken with Joana. So, I am not sure >>>> if she is available. >>>> >>>> But I wanted to make sure to leave my opinion on this issue. >>>> >>>> C >>>> >>>> On Friday, October 30, 2015, >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks, Ian and everyone! >>>> >>>> I cannot express how honored I'm for this nomination. I hope I can >>>> respond to the task with the bright it entails. >>>> >>>> As soon as nomination is confirmed I will share a pad for people to >>>> bring inputs. Will already be dreaming with some insights. >>>> >>>> Just a correction in my institutional presentation as I'm not CTS >>>> for more then 1 and half year now :): >>>> >>>> I'm founder director and creative chaos catalyst of Coding Rights, a >>>> women lead think-and-do tank with the mission to bring hackers, >>>> geeks, artists, researchers and activists together to protect, >>>> promote and mainstream digital rights and empower women on ICTs. >>>> More on @codingrights or codingrights.org >>>> (still temporary work in progress) >>>> >>>> Thank you once again and have safe travels to João Pessoa. We will >>>> be waiting for you all to cheer with caipirinhas or fresh coconut >>>> water. >>>> >>>> Kind regards, >>>> >>>> Joana >>>> >>>> On 30 Oct 2015 17:36, Lea Kaspar >>> > wrote: >>>> >>>> Congratulations to both, proud to be represented by these women. >>>> >>>> Many thanks to the CSCG for their work - excellent choices. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Lea >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Ian Peter >>>> >>> > >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Below are the two nominations from Civil Society >>>> Coordination Group for speakers for this years IGF opening >>>> and closing ceremonies. They were chosen from a field of 20 >>>> names submitted from various civil society coalitions, and >>>> have been forwarded to the IGF Secretariat. I must say that >>>> any of the 20 names submitted could have represented us >>>> admirably, and that it was a tough decision for the CSCG >>>> members to come up with 2 names. >>>> Joana Varon (Brazil) – opening ceremony – >>>> joana at varonferraz.com >>>> Nadine Moawad (Lebanon) – closing ceremony – >>>> nadine at apcwomen.org >>>> For those who don’t know them, >>>> Joana Varon Ferraz is a researcher and project coordinator >>>> at the Centre for Technology and Society from Fundação >>>> Getulio Vargas in Rio de Janeiro >>>> Nadine Moawad is a Lebanese feminist activist and >>>> grasssroots worker who leads Association for Progressive >>>> Communication (APC)'s sexual >>>> rights work. >>>> We commend them both as informed excellent communicators to >>>> represent civil society. They have both been informed of >>>> their nominations. >>>> Ian Peter (Independent Chair, Civil Society Coordination >>>> Group) >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >>>> >>> ');>. >>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> /Carolina Rossini / >>>> /Vice President, International Policy/ >>>> *Public Knowledge* >>>> _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_ >>>> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>>> >>>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >>>> >>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >>>> >>>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > -- > Dr. Anja Kovacs > The Internet Democracy Project > > +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs > www.internetdemocracy.in > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From puneeth.nagaraj at nludelhi.ac.in Sat Nov 7 01:22:21 2015 From: puneeth.nagaraj at nludelhi.ac.in (Puneeth Nagaraj) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 11:52:21 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Analysis of the WSIS+10 Draft Outcome Document Message-ID: Dear All, Apologies for cross-posting! As you must be aware, the Draft Outcome document for the WSIS+10 High Level Meeting has been released . The Centre For Communication Governance, Delhi has published an analysis of the draft and looks at the changes since the Zero Draft. You can find the post below. Please let us know your thoughts or if you think we missed out on something. https://ccgnludelhi.wordpress.com/2015/11/07/ccgs-analysis-of-the-draft-outcome-document-initial-thoughts/ Best, Puneeth -- Puneeth Nagaraj | Senior Fellow Centre for Communication Governance | National Law University, Delhi | Sector-14, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110078 | Cell: (+91) 956-091-4899 | Fax: (+91) 11-280-34256 | www.ccgdelhi.org . www.nludelhi.ac.in | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Sat Nov 7 04:20:56 2015 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 20:20:56 +1100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 In-Reply-To: <1446826181855.50896@syr.edu> References: , <1446826181855.50896@syr.edu> Message-ID: Following up on this letter - We have heard today from the Head of the NGO Branch of DESA as follows: ”I have discussed the matter with the representatives of the co-facilitators and of the President of the General Assembly this afternoon and wish to inform you that there is a common understanding that the members of the selection committee for civil society speakers will be composed exclusively of civil society representatives. Selection of private sector speakers will follow a parallel track.” Which is good news and what we asked for. (and presumably the same pattern applies for technical community and academic reps) We will know Monday who is involved in the Selection Committee as civil society representatives. (Applications for this close November 8) Also please be aware that applications for speaker positions close November 12 – we need good candidates! The application form is available at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ffRSw8C5UGYRKrzdpCiWnyc2EMVTbmZ1SVGNnhs0FcQ/viewform Ian Peter From: Lee W McKnight Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2015 3:09 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Ian Peter ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; forum at justnetcoalition.org ; Mueller, Milton L Subject: Re: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 +1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org on behalf of Mueller, Milton L Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 10:09 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Ian Peter; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; forum at justnetcoalition.org Subject: RE: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 Nice job, support the content of the letter --MM From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Ian Peter Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:45 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net; forum at justnetcoalition.org Subject: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 Dear Civil Society members, (with apologies for cross posting) Below is a letter just sent by CSCG to the organisers of the WSIS speaker selection process, a matter which has been under discussion on various lists. (and as a result much discussion within CSCG) This is also to let you know that CSCG has also decided to endorse Ian Peter and Lea Kaspar to represent its interests on the selection committee, and they will be forwarding details in due course. We acknowledge and respect the decision of JNC not to participate in the process as outlined by DESA, and hence in the selection of candidates to be endorsed by CSCG for their proposed selection committee. We imagine that some discussions will take place in forthcoming days as regards the issues raised in our letter. We will keep you informed of any major developments. LETTER FOLLOWS Dear Co-facilitators of WSIS + 10 process, We are writing to you on behalf of the Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG), a “coalition of coalitions” working actively on internet governance issues. Our member coalitions (Association for Progressive Communications, Best Bits Coalition, Internet Governance Caucus, Just Net Coalition, and Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN) extends to some thousands of individual members and hundreds of civil society organisations working actively on internet governance issues. Many have been involved with the WSIS process since its inception. Firstly, we wish to commend you for your efforts to include voices of non-governmental actors in the WSIS + 10 process. However, we would like to raise a serious concern about one part of the process, whereby selection of civil society speakers for various events appears to be being done by a selection committee which includes representatives of other non-governmental stakeholder groups. You will understand that it is of utmost importance for maintaining the independence of civil society that its representatives are chosen by civil society alone, and having other stakeholder representatives as part of a selection committee for civil society representation, or as final arbiters of our representation, is problematic for us. Indeed, in the evolution of the multistakeholder model of internet governance, this was made quite clear in the Netmundial Outcomes Declaration. I quote: "Stakeholder representatives appointed to multistakeholder Internet governance processes should be selected through open, democratic, and transparent processes. Different stakeholder groups should self - manage their processes based on inclusive, publicly known, well defined and accountable mechanisms." In accordance with this principle, CSCG has established its own internal selection processes, which can be found at http://www.internetgov-cs.org/procedures. These are transparent processes, accepted and adopted by a wide range of civil society organisations, and used effectively in the past for selection of civil society representatives for e.g. IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group, Speakers for IGF Opening and Closing ceremonies, The Netmundial meeting, and various other UN and international events where CS speakers and representatives have been required. These procedures take into account gender and geographic balance as a central matter of our determinations. Since some deadlines are quite close with respect to the currently announced process, we request your urgent intervention in this regard. Our proposal is that each stakeholder group choose its own speaker representatives and put these forward. We do realise that increasing - both as widening and as deepening - civil society engagement with the UN is a challenging and complex process, and we salute your pioneering efforts in this regard. The Internet Governance Civil Society Co-ordination Group (CSCG) remains available to assist you in this matter. Sincerely Ian Peter Independent Chair, Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group Endorsed by CSCG Members: Chat Garcia Ramilo, Association for Progressive Communications Jeremy Malcolm, Best Bits Coalition Deirdre Williams and Analia Apsis, Internet Governance Caucus, Norbert Bollow, Just Net Coalition Robin Gross, Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nashton at consensus.pro Sat Nov 7 04:32:32 2015 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 10:32:32 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 In-Reply-To: References: <1446826181855.50896@syr.edu> Message-ID: <99211DB3-F112-4A97-A6E4-501C4693B210@consensus.pro> Dear Ian, and all involved in the letter, a partial win. DESA are still picking the selectors, instead of the CSG doing the selecting, but you did get the concession on who is amongst the selectors. > On 7 Nov 2015, at 10:20, Ian Peter wrote: > > Following up on this letter - > > We have heard today from the Head of the NGO Branch of DESA as follows: > > ”I have discussed the matter with the representatives of the co-facilitators and of the President of the General Assembly this afternoon and wish to inform you that there is a common understanding that the members of the selection committee for civil society speakers will be composed exclusively of civil society representatives. Selection of private sector speakers will follow a parallel track.” > > Which is good news and what we asked for. (and presumably the same pattern applies for technical community and academic reps) > > We will know Monday who is involved in the Selection Committee as civil society representatives. (Applications for this close November 8) > > Also please be aware that applications for speaker positions close November 12 – we need good candidates! The application form is available at https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1ffRSw8C5UGYRKrzdpCiWnyc2EMVTbmZ1SVGNnhs0FcQ/viewform > > Ian Peter > > From: Lee W McKnight > Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2015 3:09 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Ian Peter ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; forum at justnetcoalition.org ; Mueller, Milton L > Subject: Re: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 > > +1 > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > on behalf of Mueller, Milton L > > Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 10:09 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; Ian Peter; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; forum at justnetcoalition.org > Subject: RE: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 > > Nice job, support the content of the letter > --MM > <> > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of Ian Peter > Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:45 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org ; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net ; forum at justnetcoalition.org > Subject: [governance] CSCG and the speaker selection process for WSIS+10 > > Dear Civil Society members, (with apologies for cross posting) > > Below is a letter just sent by CSCG to the organisers of the WSIS speaker selection process, a matter which has been under discussion on various lists. (and as a result much discussion within CSCG) > > This is also to let you know that CSCG has also decided to endorse Ian Peter and Lea Kaspar to represent its interests on the selection committee, and they will be forwarding details in due course. We acknowledge and respect the decision of JNC not to participate in the process as outlined by DESA, and hence in the selection of candidates to be endorsed by CSCG for their proposed selection committee. > > We imagine that some discussions will take place in forthcoming days as regards the issues raised in our letter. We will keep you informed of any major developments. > > > LETTER FOLLOWS > > > Dear Co-facilitators of WSIS + 10 process, > > We are writing to you on behalf of the Internet Governance Civil Society > Coordination Group (CSCG), a “coalition of coalitions” working actively on > internet governance issues. Our member coalitions (Association for > Progressive Communications, Best Bits Coalition, Internet Governance Caucus, > Just Net Coalition, and Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN) extends > to some thousands of individual members and hundreds of civil society > organisations working actively on internet governance issues. Many have been > involved with the WSIS process since its inception. > > Firstly, we wish to commend you for your efforts to include voices of > non-governmental actors in the WSIS + 10 process. > > However, we would like to raise a serious concern about one part of the > process, whereby selection of civil society speakers for various events > appears to be being done by a selection committee which includes > representatives of other non-governmental stakeholder groups. > > You will understand that it is of utmost importance for maintaining the > independence of civil society that its representatives are chosen by civil > society alone, and having other stakeholder representatives as part of a > selection committee for civil society representation, or as final arbiters > of our representation, is problematic for us. > > Indeed, in the evolution of the multistakeholder model of internet > governance, this was made quite clear in the Netmundial Outcomes > Declaration. I quote: > > "Stakeholder representatives appointed to multistakeholder Internet > governance processes should be selected through open, democratic, and > transparent processes. Different stakeholder groups should self - manage > their processes based on inclusive, publicly known, well defined and > accountable mechanisms." > > In accordance with this principle, CSCG has established its own internal > selection processes, which can be found at > http://www.internetgov-cs.org/procedures . These are transparent processes, accepted and adopted by a wide range of civil society organisations, and used effectively in the past for selection of civil society representatives for e.g. IGF’s Multistakeholder Advisory Group, Speakers for IGF Opening and Closing ceremonies, The Netmundial meeting, and various other UN and international events where CS speakers and representatives have been required. These procedures take into account gender and geographic balance as a central matter of our determinations. > > Since some deadlines are quite close with respect to the currently announced > process, we request your urgent intervention in this regard. Our proposal is > that each stakeholder group choose its own speaker representatives and put > these forward. > > We do realise that increasing - both as widening and as deepening - civil > society engagement with the UN is a challenging and complex process, and we > salute your pioneering efforts in this regard. The Internet Governance Civil > Society Co-ordination Group (CSCG) remains available to assist you in this > matter. > > > Sincerely > > Ian Peter > Independent Chair, Internet Governance Civil Society Coordination Group > > Endorsed by CSCG Members: > > Chat Garcia Ramilo, Association for Progressive Communications > Jeremy Malcolm, Best Bits Coalition > Deirdre Williams and Analia Apsis, Internet Governance Caucus, > Norbert Bollow, Just Net Coalition > Robin Gross, Non Commercial Stakeholders Group of ICANN > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 670 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From Christina.de.Castell at ifla.org Sat Nov 7 09:49:59 2015 From: Christina.de.Castell at ifla.org (Christina de Castell) Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 14:49:59 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Invitation to Public Access in Libraries Dynamic Coalition Nov 12 at 11:00 Message-ID: Apologies for cross-posting Libraries Connect the Next Billion Thursday, November 12, 11:00-12:30, Workshop Room 6 How do we ensure that we connect the next billion, in absence of technology and connectivity that can reach every individual, globally? The Dynamic Coalition on Public Access in Libraries believes that this will only be possible when we recognize the value of the institutions that we already have in our communities for connecting people and information: 320,000 public libraries. The Dynamic Coalition is presenting a statement of principles for feedback during the 2015 IGF main sessions that proposes the critical role of libraries for connecting communities and individuals. In preparation for taking action on these principles, panelists at the DC-PAL workshop will discuss how organizations are connecting communities, and provide examples of actions that each stakeholder group can take so that libraries can realize their potential to connect the next billion. Following this discussion, participants will participate in planning the work of the DC-PAL in 2016. The coordinators propose that the objective of 2016 will be to agree upon three concrete actions that members of each stakeholder group can take to further the principles of promoting connectivity, access and media and information literacy through libraries. Speakers: · Manu K. Bhardwaj, U.S. Department of State – Global Connect Initiative · Stuart Hamilton, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) – UN 2030 Development Agenda · Ramunė Petuchovaitė, Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL) – Capacity building in Ghana, Kenya and Uganda. · Additional speakers TBA · Moderator: Christina de Castell, International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) Schedule · 11:00-11:50 Discussion of existing initiatives that promote public access in libraries by participating stakeholder groups · 11:50-12:20 Proposal and discussion of recommended stakeholder actions to promote the DC-PAL principles as 2016 DC-PAL activity · 12:20-12:30 Conclusion and action plan Link to session: http://sched.co/4c0t Link to Principles on Public Access in Libraries: http://review.intgovforum.org/igf-2015/dynamic-coalitions/dynamic-coalition- on-public-access-in-libraries-dc-pal/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Sat Nov 7 22:02:20 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 01:02:20 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: TPP Text - section by section commentary In-Reply-To: <42682ADA-FFE4-4907-9DD1-AE704AD54750@sydney.edu.au> References: <42682ADA-FFE4-4907-9DD1-AE704AD54750@sydney.edu.au> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: *Kimberlee Weatherall* Date: Saturday, November 7, 2015 Subject: TPP Text - section by section commentary To: IP-ENFORCEMENT at roster.wcl.american.edu Hi all, I’ve done a section-by-section on the general provisions, trade marks, GIs, designs and the copyright provisions. Enforcement to come. It’s the detail - not the higher level commentary. But I’ve done comparisons with other treaties (TRIPS, ACTA, AUSFTA) and some comment on the import of the text. Might be useful background for anyone trying to understand a particular provision. General provs, trade mark, GI, industrial designs here: http://works.bepress.com/kimweatherall/31/ Copyright here: http://works.bepress.com/kimweatherall/32/ Cheers Kim Weatherall (Sydney Law School). On 6 Nov 2015, at 1:15 am, Michael Palmedo > wrote: TPP Text: http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Treaties-and-International-Law/01-Treaties-for-which-NZ-is-Depositary/0-Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Text.php -- Mike Palmedo Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property American University Washington College of Law 4801 Massachusetts Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20016 W: 202-274-4442 | M: 571-289-3683 pijip.org | infojustice.org | us.creativecommons.org If you would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list please click the below link: mailto:LISTSERV at ROSTER.WCL.AMERICAN.EDU ?body=SIGNOFF%20IP-ENFORCEMENT&SUBJECT=Remove If you would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list please click the below link: mailto:LISTSERV at ROSTER.WCL.AMERICAN.EDU ?body=SIGNOFF%20IP-ENFORCEMENT&SUBJECT=Remove -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bkilic at citizen.org Sun Nov 8 07:22:21 2015 From: bkilic at citizen.org (Burcu Kilic) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 12:22:21 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] The analysis of the TPP e-commerce chapter Message-ID: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC6B72@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> For those catching up on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) text, here are is the analysis of the e-commerce chapter we sent around. It is a joint publication of Public Citizen and Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) at the University of Ottawa Faculty of Law. http://www.citizen.org/documents/tpp-ecommerce-chapter-analysis.pdf The chapter sets rules that, if ratified, will shape the development of the digital economy for years to come. The clauses highlight the importance of e-commerce and of eliminating trade restrictions by expanding the legal use of e-commerce platforms, paperless trade administration, protecting users from abuse and damages, and removing 'non-tariff barriers'. The chapter includes rules and procedures for trade in goods and services conveyed by the Internet and other electronic means, and addresses a range of issues including: 1- No-discrimination policy for digital goods 2- The first-ever trade obligation on cross-border transfer of data. The provision includes a difficult to use and insufficient exception for public policy measures (such as data protection). The exception language has many layers of qualifications, which are similar to the general exceptions adopted in Article XIV of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and Article XX of the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT). In only one of 44 cases ( 43 GATT & 1 GATS case), were all conditions for application of a GATT or GATS general exception deemed satisfied. Adopting a similar exception for WTO-plus rules in the TPP does not safeguard privacy and individual liberties. 3- The-first ever trade obligation prohibiting requirements that servers be located (or data stored) locally. The provision also includes a difficult to use and insufficient exception for public policy measures. (See above). 4- An inert mechanism for privacy which does no more than require the presence of a 'legal framework' for protecting personal information. The provision also encourages interoperability of privacy regimes, an approach that has been used in the past to initiate a 'race to the bottom' whereby the lowest standards from each jurisdiction are adopted 5- An open access framework leaving open an entire universe of discriminatory and innovation-harming activity that traffic carriers can leverage and which regulators have found objectionable. The provision fails to effectively address existing net neutrality problems. It only meaningfully addresses the most egregious neutrality violations (those relating to blocking of access to content) and even here broadly exempts "reasonable network management". 6- A provision minimizing restrictions on the use of electronic signatures 7- A provision on spam resenting as alternative options but leaving Parties with significant latitude in how they choose to regulate electronic spam. 8- A prohibition on requirements for disclosure of source code as a condition of import, distribution, sale or use of software or of products containing software (does not operate so as to prevent a government from obligating specific modifications of source code) 9- Cooperation in order to improve e- commerce and solve any related problems. The chapter should be read alongside each Party's schedule of non-conforming measures, which applies to some of the provisions. The chapter does not apply to government procurement or information held or processed by or on behalf of a Party or measures related to such information and its collection, e.g. health data collected by the Governments. Enjoy it, Burcu Burcu Kilic, Ph.D. Public Citizen | Protecting Health, Safety and Democracy TEL: +1 202-588-7792 1600 20th St NW, Washington, DC 20009 URL: http://www.citizen.org/access Twitter: @burcuno -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Sun Nov 8 07:23:10 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 12:23:10 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] IGF2015 - WSIS+10 Main Session, 9AM/ Day 1 Message-ID: Dear friends, *[With apologies for cross-posting]* On behalf of the session co-organisers, you are cordially invited to attend the IGF main session “Ten-Year Review of the World Summit on the Information Society: Developing Messages from the IGF Community”, taking place from 09:00 to 12:30 on Tuesday, November 10/ Day 1. The session, which will be joined by the UN General Assembly WSIS+10 Co-facilitators - H.E. Mr. Janis Maieiks and H.E. Mrs. Lana Zaki Nusseibeh, who will be participating as active observers, will give the IGF audience a unique opportunity to share their views on the most recent draft of the WSIS+10 Review Process outcome document . The session will consist of three parts: Time Session Format Speaker 09:00 - 09:15 PART 1: Setting the scene/ Info sharing Statements Host Chair + MAG Chair 09:15 - 09:45 Co-facilitators 09:45 - 12:10 PART 2: Developing messages from the IGF community Interactive open mike interaction based on Draft Outcome Document IGF community 12:10 - 12:30 PART 3: Recap of key messages Presentation Rapporteurs Moderators: H.E. Amb. Benedicto Fonseca Filho, Lynn St. Amour, Ginger Paque (remote) - Part 1: Setting the scene. After introductory remarks by the host country chair and the MAG chair, UNGA Co-facilitators will give an update on the state of the formal WSIS+10 preparatory process. - Part 2: Developing messages from the IGF community. In this part of the session, IGF stakeholders will be invited to share their views on the WSIS+10 with the aim to develop messages from the IGF community as input into the WSIS+10 Review process. The basis for the interaction will be the WSIS+10 Review Draft Outcome Document, available here: http://workspace.unpan.org/sites/Internet/Documents/UNPAN95572.pdf In what constitutes an IGF first, in this part of the session, comments from the audience will be collected through an interactive, NETmundial-style consultation process. Inputs will rotate across 5 microphones, with 4 dedicated to each IGF stakeholder community, and one microphone reserved for remote participants. *Guiding questions for this part of the session are pasted below. These questions are subject to change. * - Part 3: In this part of the session, summary of key messages from part 2 will be presented by session rapporteurs. For more information about the the session, please visit the session webpage . Please share this info with your networks! We look forward to seeing you soon in Joao Pessoa. Warm wishes, Lea Kaspar, Marilyn Cade, Shita Laksmi, Lynn St. Amour, Jandyr Ferreira dos Santos --- WSIS+10 Main Session - GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR INTERVENTIONS - DRAFT (November 5) Section 1: ICT4D Time: 40 minutes (=20 individual 2-min interventions, 4 per mic) - How can ICTs be harnessed for sustainable development? What insights and experiences from the last 10 years should be highlighted by the review? - What concrete measures can help bridge the digital divide, including between and within countries, and between women and men? - How can the IGF community contribute to the implementation of the SDGs and achieving ICT4D for all? - There has been a call to link the SDG framework with the WSIS framework. How could this be done and what could be the role of the IGF in these efforts? Section 2: Internet Governance Time: 40 minutes (=20 individual 2-min interventions, 4 per mic) - What should the main goals of Internet governance be now and in the future? - For how long should the IGF mandate be extended? How should improvements be implemented? What should be role of UN? - What are the respective roles of governments and non-governmental stakeholders? How do you view their fulfillment over the last 10 years and how should they develop in the future? - How can Enhanced Cooperation across the IG ecosystem be improved through the WSIS framework? Section 3: Implementation and follow up Time: 20 minutes (=10 individual 2-min interventions, 2 per mic) - What financing mechanisms should be put in place to implement WSIS outcomes? - The review of implementation of the WSIS outcomes has taken place at 5-year intervals. How often should reviews take place and what should be their nature? - What role can the IGF and various national and regional IGFs play in WSIS implementation and follow-up? - What should be the objectives of the annual WSIS Forum and the CSTD with respect to WSIS? Section 4: Other (questions in this section might end up being included under above sections, depending on structure of draft) Time: 40 minutes (=10 individual 2-min interventions, 4 per mic + 20 individual 1 min interventions, 4 per mic) - How should human rights issues related to ICTs be addressed in the outcome document? - How should the outcome document handle present and emerging concerns about cybersecurity? - Is a global approach to data privacy required? --- *Lea Kaspar* Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspar gp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Sun Nov 8 07:30:01 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 09:30:01 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: [tpp-allies] analysis of TPP IP chapter by Assoc Law Prof Weatherall (IP expert) - copyright, TM, GI, designs, enforcement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sanya Reid Smith Date: Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 1:38 AM Subject: [tpp-allies] analysis of TPP IP chapter by Assoc Law Prof Weatherall (IP expert) - copyright, TM, GI, designs, enforcement To: tpp-allies By http://sydney.edu.au/law/about/people/profiles/kimberlee.weatherall.php: It’s a section-by-section on the general provisions, trade marks, GIs, designs and the copyright provisions. Enforcement to come. It’s the detail - not the higher level commentary. But I’ve done comparisons with other treaties (TRIPS, ACTA, AUSFTA) and some comment on the import of the text. Might be useful background for anyone trying to understand a particular provision. General provs, trade mark, GI, industrial designs here: http://works.bepress.com/kimweatherall/31/ Copyright here: http://works.bepress.com/kimweatherall/32/ --- You are currently subscribed to tpp-allies as: carolina.rossini at gmail.com. To unsubscribe click here: http://cts.citizen.org/u?id=91878272.0fdf8f795e90524a058f5568c6585c6e&n=T&l=tpp-allies&o=3270600 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-3270600-91878272.0fdf8f795e90524a058f5568c6585c6e at listserver.citizen.org -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anja at internetdemocracy.in Sun Nov 8 14:54:57 2015 From: anja at internetdemocracy.in (Anja Kovacs) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 01:24:57 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Invitation: WSIS+10 Review Civil Society Strategy Meeting at IGF2015 Message-ID: Dear all, It gives us great pleasure to invite you to the *Joao Pessao WSIS+10 Review Civil Society Strategy Meeting tomorrow, from 2-6 pm, at the Joao Pessao 2015 IGF venue. * This event is coorganised by the Association for Progressive Communications, the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions, in collaboration with the Center for Technology and Society of the Getulio Vargas Foundation (CTS-FGV), Center for Democracy and Technology, Coding Rights, Global Partners Digital, Kickanet and Public Knowledge. As you all know, in December 2015, a WSIS+10 Overall Review High Level Meeting of the UN General Assembly will assess the progress made in implementing the WSIS outcome documents as well as decide on the way forward. As the 2015 IGF takes places only shortly before this meeting, it is an excellent opportunity for civil society to *take stock of where we are in the preparatory process, as well as to strategise about how we can make sure that civil society's main concerns are appropriately reflected in the final outcome document*. Moreover, as the cofacilitators of the WSIS+10 Review process are present in Brazil, and as there is a main session on the WSIS+10 Review at the IGF as well, there are *opportunities for civil society to strenghten its voice in the process at the IGF as well*. To make the most of all those opportunities and building on earlier similar regional and global civil society initiatives , we invite all civil society participants in the 2015 IGF to join us for a session that will: - update you on the process, the main issues at stake and the major faultlines between our governments - share information from earlier regional and global civil society events on the WSIS+10 Review, and the extent to which inputs in the review process which were based on these events are reflected in the current draft outcome document - outline the content of the latest draft, and where the main faultlines with civil society input lie - provide an opportunity to jointly strategise on how to make sure that civil society priorities are strongly reflected in the WSIS+10 Review main session (building on the earlier experience at the NETmundial with similar formats) - collectivitely strategise on the main messages that civil society wants to convey to the co-facilitators of the WSIS+10 Review process, Amb. Nusseibeh from the UAE and Amb. Mazeiks from Latvia. Amb. Nusseibeh from the UAE will be joining the event part of the time. In addition, a civil society meeting with Amb. Mazeiks from Latvia has been scheduled for Wednesday morning, ensuring another opportunity to convey our messages. For more information, please write to anja at internetdemocracy.in or deborah at apc.org. We hope that many of you will be able to join us tomorrow afternoon! With warm regards, On behalf of the organisers, Anja -- Dr. Anja Kovacs The Internet Democracy Project +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs www.internetdemocracy.in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mishi at softwarefreedom.org Sun Nov 8 20:34:27 2015 From: mishi at softwarefreedom.org (Mishi Choudhary) Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2015 23:34:27 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] APC priorities for IGF 2015 Message-ID: Thanks Valeria  Extremely useful!  Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device -------- Original message -------- From: Valeria Betancourt Date: 11/6/2015 1:26 PM (GMT-03:00) To: Best Bits , governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [bestbits] APC priorities for IGF 2015 Dear all, Attached is the document of APC's priorities for the IGF 2015. As compendium of our activities for in João Pessoa is available at https://www.apc.org/en/node/21198/ Best, Valeria -- Valeria Betancourt Directora / Manager Programa de Políticas de Information y Comunicación / Communication and Information Policy Programme Asociación para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones / Association for Progressive Communications, APC http://www.apc.org ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list:      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mariliamaciel at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 12:56:19 2015 From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 15:56:19 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF In-Reply-To: <5635446A.10701@wzb.eu> References: <329E4D25FA9741FBA266911DB82F76DD@Toshiba> <5635446A.10701@wzb.eu> Message-ID: Congratulations to the speakers and to CSCG! I agree with Carolina's diagnosis of the national problems. However, I believe that the opening ceremony usually resonates more with politicians and the media than the closing session. As Mike remarked, it also sets the tone of the event, and I believe it is important that national issues are raised whenever appropriate throughout the whole meeting. For that, it is important that all stakeholders, from Brazil and abroad, are aware of the problems. Joana's remarks could make sure that they are. Best wishes, Marília On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: > Hi Carolina, > > why would the closing ceremony be the better choice? Isn't better for > Joana to speak at the opening ceremony when national politicians and the > press are around? > > Jeanette > > > Am 31.10.15 um 18:31 schrieb Carolina Rossini: > >> Good that you sent an updated bio Jo, I was about to do that when I saw >> Ian's email. >> >> I am very happy about the nominations, but I would invert the order of >> possible. Having a Brazilian at the end, as we had Grace and Burcu as CS >> for closing ceremony, is VERY important politically. >> >> Not just for CS, but actually more as a opportunity to have the closing >> speech also refer to national issues and ask specific commitments from >> the Brazilian policy makers there. As Joana is incredible aware, since >> she is deeply involved in the discussions, folks are trying to >> puncture Marco Civil and cut back on other digital rights in Brazil... >> We - the digital rights community - lost a lot of attention due to all >> the political corruption that has take over all the media attention. >> >> We need to have Joana - as a Brasilian - putting the "country" against >> the wall in front of everybody. And I feel the closing ceremony is >> better for that purpose. >> >> I am saying all this without having spoken with Joana. So, I am not sure >> if she is available. >> >> But I wanted to make sure to leave my opinion on this issue. >> >> C >> >> On Friday, October 30, 2015, > > wrote: >> >> Thanks, Ian and everyone! >> >> I cannot express how honored I'm for this nomination. I hope I can >> respond to the task with the bright it entails. >> >> As soon as nomination is confirmed I will share a pad for people to >> bring inputs. Will already be dreaming with some insights. >> >> Just a correction in my institutional presentation as I'm not CTS >> for more then 1 and half year now :): >> >> I'm founder director and creative chaos catalyst of Coding Rights, a >> women lead think-and-do tank with the mission to bring hackers, >> geeks, artists, researchers and activists together to protect, >> promote and mainstream digital rights and empower women on ICTs. >> More on @codingrights or codingrights.org >> (still temporary work in progress) >> >> Thank you once again and have safe travels to João Pessoa. We will >> be waiting for you all to cheer with caipirinhas or fresh coconut >> water. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Joana >> >> On 30 Oct 2015 17:36, Lea Kaspar > > wrote: >> >> Congratulations to both, proud to be represented by these women. >> >> Many thanks to the CSCG for their work - excellent choices. >> >> Best wishes, >> Lea >> >> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Ian Peter >> > > wrote: >> >> Below are the two nominations from Civil Society >> Coordination Group for speakers for this years IGF opening >> and closing ceremonies. They were chosen from a field of 20 >> names submitted from various civil society coalitions, and >> have been forwarded to the IGF Secretariat. I must say that >> any of the 20 names submitted could have represented us >> admirably, and that it was a tough decision for the CSCG >> members to come up with 2 names. >> Joana Varon (Brazil) – opening ceremony – >> joana at varonferraz.com >> Nadine Moawad (Lebanon) – closing ceremony – >> nadine at apcwomen.org >> For those who don’t know them, >> Joana Varon Ferraz is a researcher and project coordinator >> at the Centre for Technology and Society from Fundação >> Getulio Vargas in Rio de Janeiro >> Nadine Moawad is a Lebanese feminist activist and >> grasssroots worker who leads Association for Progressive >> Communication (APC)'s sexual >> rights work. >> We commend them both as informed excellent communicators to >> represent civil society. They have both been informed of >> their nominations. >> Ian Peter (Independent Chair, Civil Society Coordination >> Group) >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >> > ');>. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> /Carolina Rossini / >> /Vice President, International Policy/ >> *Public Knowledge* >> _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_ >> + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- *Marília Maciel* Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law School http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gangesh.varma at nludelhi.ac.in Mon Nov 9 02:30:15 2015 From: gangesh.varma at nludelhi.ac.in (Gangesh S. Varma) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 13:00:15 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] IGF Invitation: Roundtable on Equity and the Developing World in Internet Governance (Thursday, 12 Nov., Room 10 at 2.00 pm) Message-ID: Dear All, The Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University, Delhi and Digital Asia Hub are hosting a roundtable on *'Equity and the Developing World in Internet Governance'* [*Workshop 78] *at the IGF this year. The roundtable will take place from *14:00 - 15:30 *on* Thursday, 12th November *at* Workshop Room 10*. The workshop aims to discuss, the concept of equity in the changing contours of the 'multistakeholder model'. Equity, in the context of global internet governance, could refer to two concerns: *Firstly*, the equitable representation of voices and perspectives from developing countries and emerging economies, especially civil society, in Internet Governance policy debates. *Secondly* and equally critical, is the notion of inter - generational equity. The Internet community of today is constantly evolving, bringing in new actors, constituencies and interests. The roundtable discussion will attempt to articulate equity principles, with specific reference to three existing Internet Governance structures: ICANN, the WSIS process, and the ITU. Are Internet governance structures well placed to absorb and accommodate new entrants who do not speak the epistemic language of domain names and protocols? If not, what are the institutional barriers preventing such adaptability? The areas of discussion include but are not limited to the following: 1. Equity as increased access and meaningful participation for actors from the developing world. 2. Spaces where claims to equity can be made: ITU, ICANN and WSIS and constituent bodies, associated working groups, regional and national level governance mechanisms. 3. Processes that should be more equitable - plenary meetings, multistakeholder consultations, expert networks and implementation programmes. 4. Barriers to equity and meaningful participation - funding, capacity, representation and gender. The roundtable will be moderated by Professor Ang Peng Hwa, Member - Steering Committee, Digital Asia Hub and President - elect, International Communication Association. The confirmed participants include Rahul Gosain, Buru Kilic, David Bogado, Jan Scholte, Jane Coffin, Javier Pallero, Milton Mueller, Mwendwa Kivuva, Nigel Hickson, Parminder Jeet Singh, Paul Wilson, Peter Micek, Rafik Dammak and Sheetal Kumar. We hope to see many of there and do feel free to get in touch for any details. [Apologies for cross-posting] Best, Gangesh -- Gangesh Sreekumar Varma | Senior Fellow Centre for Communication Governance | National Law University, Delhi | Sector-14, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110078 | Cell: (+91) 8447159123 | Fax: (+91) 11-280-34256 | www.ccgdelhi.org . www.ccgtlr.org . www.nludelhi.ac.in | Twitter: @ccgdelhi . @gangeshvarma -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vferra7 at palermo.edu Mon Nov 9 08:24:10 2015 From: vferra7 at palermo.edu (=?UTF-8?Q?Ver=C3=B3nica_Ferrari?=) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 10:24:10 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] =?UTF-8?Q?IGF2015_/_Tomorrow=2C_9AM_=E2=80=93_Access_a?= =?UTF-8?Q?nd_Human_Rights_Session?= Message-ID: Dear all, CELE and the Center for Studies on Technology and Society (CETYS) would like to invite you to the workshop *“Having your cake and eating it too: can internet rights and access goals be reconciled?”*, *tomorrow from 9 to 10.30 a.m. in Workshop Room 1*. This workshop seeks to address how internet governance often seems to navigate between two seemingly competing goals: on the one hand, the protection of desirable governance principles such as user privacy and the open architecture of the network; on the other, the provision of affordable access to internet infrastructure and services to as many users as possible. Some of the key questions that will orient the debate are: How can a balance be struck between these seemingly competing goals? Can empirical research help advance the discussion beyond the statement of principles? Are internet governance principles necessarily at odds with expanded access goals? In other words, can we have our cake and it eat too? *Speakers:* - *Alison Gillwald, ICT Africa* - *Anriette Esterhuysen, Association for Progressive Communications (APC)* - *Carolina Botero, Karisma Foundation* - Eduardo Bertoni, Center for Studies on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information (CELE) - José Clastornik, AGESIC – Uruguay - Juan Jung, Iberoamerican Association of Telecom Enterprises (AHCIET) - Helani Galpaya, LIRNEasia - Martín Waserman, Facebook - Mishi Choudhary, Software Freedom Law Center - Sebastián Bellagamba, Internet Society Moderator: Hernan Galperín, Annenberg School for Communication For more information and event registration, *please click here * We really hope that you can join us! All the best. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 13:38:05 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 00:08:05 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF Message-ID: Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? password Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to join easily. Sivasubramanian M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andersj at elon.edu Mon Nov 9 13:43:49 2015 From: andersj at elon.edu (Janna Anderson) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 18:43:49 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree that there's too much of a bar to remote participation - more than ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep getting notices that rooms aren't available or not "active" when I can see on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what's going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead - not even close to a good alternative. Janna From: Sivasubramanian M > Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M > Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >, "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" >, "forum at justnetcoalition.org" > Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? password Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to join easily. Sivasubramanian M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 13:52:09 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 00:22:09 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Janna. ICANN meetings happen on adobe, the rooms don't require a password, so there is good and increasing participation. The design of remote participation in this IGF does keep participants out. Sivasubramanian M On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:13 AM, Janna Anderson wrote: > I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – more than > ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep > getting notices that rooms aren’t available or not “active” when I can see > on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what’s > going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead – not even close > to a good alternative. > > Janna > > From: Sivasubramanian M > Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M > Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , > "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" , " > forum at justnetcoalition.org" > Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF > > Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from > Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the > IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? > password > > Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that > the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some > difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? > ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to > join easily. > > Sivasubramanian M > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 14:15:13 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 00:45:13 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] 6th meeting of the Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Message-ID: Hello All, Please join the 6th meeting of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values at Workshop Room 3 on 11th November, 14 00 - 15 30 hours. This dynamic coalition on Core Internet Values was formed following the "Workshop on Fundamentals: Core Internet Values" held during the 2009 IGF at Egypt, chaired by the Internet Society Past President Lynn St.Amour. The Coalition has met during the five IGFs that followed Egypt and its sixth meeting is at Brazil, to be chaired by Olivier Crepin Le-Blond. The pursuit of the Coalition in general is to work towards causing the Internet to evolve in such a manner that its Core Values are not compromised. The stakeholders to Internet Governance might share the view that the Internet remains Global as One Internet, Open, Free, end to end so as to foster Global Access, Permission-less Innovation and Global Prosperity. The sub-theme of the 6th meeting in particular is : "Core Internet Values as a Reference Standard for Global Internet Policy". This would be to discuss the thought that the organizations responsible for components of Internet Governance including large Internet Organizations, Governments and Civil Society organizations could formulate/contribute to formulate Internet policy in a manner that the Internet does not slip away from Core Internet Values. Panellists: Kathryn Brown, President and CEO of the Internet Society Paul Wilson, Director General of APNIC Erica Mann, Member, Board of Directors, ICANN Carlton Anthony Samuels, former Member of the At-Large Advisory Committee Mark Carvell, Representative of the United Kingdom at the Governmental Advisory Committee of ICANN Olivier Crepin Le-Blond, Past Chair of the ICANN At-Large Advisory Committee If you are in Brazil for the IGF, please join the discussions at Workshop Room 3 on 11th November during 14 00 hours - 15 30 hours. Thank you Sivasubramanian M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Nov 9 14:25:32 2015 From: gurstein at gmail.com (Michael Gurstein) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 11:25:32 -0800 Subject: [bestbits] FW: From the Digital Divide to Digital Citizenship In-Reply-To: <05dc01d11b20$8fa4a310$aeede930$@gmail.com> References: <05dc01d11b20$8fa4a310$aeede930$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <061d01d11b24$67cf5a70$376e0f50$@gmail.com> Further to some of my recent comments on these subjects. https://gurstein.wordpress.com/2015/11/09/from-the-digital-divide-to-digital -citizenship/ M -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From julia.pohle at wzb.eu Mon Nov 9 14:36:50 2015 From: julia.pohle at wzb.eu (Julia Pohle) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 16:36:50 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: GigaNet after-symposium drink tonight In-Reply-To: <5640F402.9040900@wzb.eu> References: <5640F402.9040900@wzb.eu> Message-ID: <5640F5D2.8000208@wzb.eu> Dear all Please feel welcome to join us tonight for the GigaNet after-symposium drink! Julia -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- Betreff: [GIGANET-MEMBERS] GigaNet after-symposium event tonight Datum: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 16:29:06 -0300 Antwort an: Discussion list for GigaNet Members Dear all, For all attendees of the IGF: let's celebrate the 10th GigaNet symposium at our after-symposium event, starting at 19:30 at Tambau Hotel (green area). There will be free drinks, on a first-come first-served basis (approach Daniel, Marianne or me to get vouchers). See you all tonight Julia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeanette at wzb.eu Tue Nov 10 14:22:24 2015 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 20:22:24 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] contribution to the IGF's high level meeting Message-ID: <564243F0.4020708@wzb.eu> Hi all, since several people asked, please find below the text I read yesterday at the high level leaders meeting: Mr Chair, Excellencies, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, I feel honored for being given the opportunity to offer my thoughts to this high level meeting! A crucial issue for “the future of Internet governance beyond the year 2015” concerns the interpretation, the evolution, and application of the Right to Privacy, and of Data Protection law. The Internet has challenged the foundation of the Human Right to Privacy in two important ways: The first concerns extraterritoriality. While international law is very clear about the obligation of states to protect the right to privacy within their jurisdictions, there is fundamental disagreement and uncertainty as to whether this obligation also applies outside of national jurisdictions. The second aspect concerns the role of private entities in the context of data protection. In the digital environment, a large share of data processing is carried out by the private sector, not by states. However, international human rights law is state-centric by nature and imposes obligations on states, not on private entities. As a result, the application of rights to privacy and data protection law in cross-border communication is more or less left in limbo and we lack effective means to enforce it. Data protection experts now call for globally applicable and enforceable data protection standards that • would give citizens control over their data and • be mandatory for both, governments And companies. Likewise, the new UN special rapporteur on the right to privacy, Joseph Cannataci, has expressed the need for a universal law that would address state surveillance AND the business models of Internet companies. If we assess these proposals against the multi-stakeholder philosophy that has characterized Internet governance since the end of WSIS, these proposals touch on two taboos: 1. The first taboo concerns the integration of national cyber security competences into a human rights based policy framework for the Internet that would be anchored in a multi stakeholder regime 2. The second taboo concerns establishing binding rules for the global business of mining personal data It is my belief that by breaking these taboos we increase the range of policy options we have for collectively determining the future of Internet governance. I'd like to end my intervention with an allegory: We owe to the French revolution the insight that revolutions can turn into monster, which devour their own young. We owe to whistle blowers such as Edward Snowden the empirical evidence that the digital revolution has the potential to not only destroy itself but also to undermine basic democratic principles. In this room there are many people who can play a crucial role in preventing the digital revolution from going down this path. jeanette From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca Tue Nov 10 14:39:12 2015 From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 14:39:12 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Internet Freedom among 15 surviving Ford Foundation programs Message-ID: For those following philanthropy in the digital rights area this might be of interest: excerpts belowŠ http://tinyurl.com/nv4bqus Š..The foundation has reduced the number of its subject areas from 35 to 15. The cuts will result in about 800 fewer active grants in Ford¹s portfolio, which has averaged about 4,000 in recent years. The 15 separate program areas Ford will concentrate on are grouped under the following seven headings: civic engagement and government; gender, racial, and ethnic justice; equitable development; inclusive economies; Internet freedom; youth opportunity and learning; and creativity and free expression. In a letter posted on Ford¹s website , Mr. Walker wrote that decisions on which programs to discontinue were based on how central reducing inequality is to their work, the progress they¹ve made in their goals, and the availability of other philanthropic supportŠ.. Š..Each year for the next five years, Ford plans to dedicate $200 million to strengthening institutions through what it calls its BUILD program. The goal of BUILD is to increase the longevity of social-justice organizations and networks by providing general operating support and buttressing their financesŠ. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mishi at softwarefreedom.org Sun Nov 1 13:03:57 2015 From: mishi at softwarefreedom.org (Mishi Choudhary) Date: Sun, 01 Nov 2015 12:03:57 -0600 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF Message-ID: Congratulations to the speakers! Looking forward to this.  Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device -------- Original message -------- From: Marilia Maciel Date: 11/1/2015 11:56 AM (GMT-06:00) To: Jeanette Hofmann Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org, Best Bits Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF Congratulations to the speakers and to CSCG! I agree with Carolina's diagnosis of the national problems. However, I believe that the opening ceremony usually resonates more with politicians and the media than the closing session. As Mike remarked, it also sets the tone of the event, and I believe it is important that national issues are raised whenever appropriate throughout the whole meeting. For that, it is important that all stakeholders, from Brazil and abroad, are aware of the problems. Joana's remarks could make sure that they are. Best wishes,Marília On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: Hi Carolina, why would the closing ceremony be the better choice? Isn't better for Joana to speak at the opening ceremony when national politicians and the press are around? Jeanette Am 31.10.15 um 18:31 schrieb Carolina Rossini: Good that you sent an updated bio Jo, I was about to do that when I saw Ian's email. I am very happy about the nominations, but I would invert the order of possible. Having a Brazilian at the end, as we had Grace and Burcu as CS for closing ceremony, is VERY important politically. Not just for CS, but actually more as a opportunity to have the closing speech also refer to national issues and ask specific commitments from the Brazilian policy makers there. As Joana is incredible aware, since she is deeply involved in the discussions, folks are trying to puncture Marco Civil and cut back on other digital rights in Brazil... We - the digital rights community - lost a lot of attention due to all the political corruption that has take over all the media attention. We need to have Joana - as a Brasilian - putting the "country" against the wall in front of everybody. And I feel the closing ceremony is better for that purpose. I am saying all this without having spoken with Joana. So, I am not sure if she is available. But I wanted to make sure to leave my opinion on this issue. C On Friday, October 30, 2015, > wrote:     Thanks, Ian and everyone!     I cannot express how honored I'm for this nomination. I hope I can     respond to the task with the bright it entails.     As soon as nomination is confirmed I will share a pad for people to     bring inputs. Will already be dreaming with some insights.     Just a correction in my institutional presentation as I'm not CTS     for more then 1 and half year now :):     I'm founder director and creative chaos catalyst of Coding Rights, a     women lead think-and-do tank with the mission to bring hackers,     geeks, artists, researchers and activists together to protect,     promote and mainstream digital rights and empower women on ICTs.     More on @codingrights or codingrights.org     (still temporary work in progress)     Thank you once again and have safe travels to João Pessoa. We will     be waiting for you all to cheer with caipirinhas or fresh coconut     water.     Kind regards,     Joana     On 30 Oct 2015 17:36, Lea Kaspar > wrote:         Congratulations to both, proud to be represented by these women.         Many thanks to the CSCG for their work - excellent choices.         Best wishes,         Lea         On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Ian Peter         > wrote:             Below are the two nominations from Civil Society             Coordination Group for speakers for this years IGF opening             and closing ceremonies. They were chosen from a field of 20             names submitted from various civil society coalitions, and             have been forwarded to the IGF Secretariat. I must say that             any of the 20 names submitted could have represented us             admirably, and that it was a tough decision for the CSCG             members to come up with 2 names.             Joana Varon (Brazil) – opening ceremony – joana at varonferraz.com             Nadine Moawad (Lebanon) – closing ceremony – nadine at apcwomen.org             For those who don’t know them,             Joana Varon Ferraz is a researcher and project coordinator             at the Centre for Technology and Society from Fundação             Getulio Vargas in Rio de Janeiro             Nadine Moawad is a Lebanese feminist activist and             grasssroots worker who leads Association for Progressive             Communication (APC)'s sexual             rights work.             We commend them both as informed excellent communicators to             represent civil society. They have both been informed of             their nominations.             Ian Peter (Independent Chair, Civil Society Coordination Group)             ____________________________________________________________             You received this message as a subscriber on the list:             bestbits at lists.bestbits.net             .             To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:             http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- /Carolina Rossini / /Vice President, International Policy/ *Public Knowledge* _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_ + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list:       governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit:       http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see:       http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:       http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list:      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- Marília MacielPesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito RioResearcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law Schoolhttp://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.eduPoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en  -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Nov 10 15:21:40 2015 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 01:51:40 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! parminder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Nov 10 15:36:13 2015 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 02:06:13 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Joana's speech In-Reply-To: References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5642553D.6000500@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 11 November 2015 01:55 AM, Antonio Medina Gómez wrote: > Joana receives greetings, appreciation and respect for the firmness of > your words aimed at promoting economic and social development of citizens. And that (just a ) tinge of nervousness gave it a warm extra human dimension of deep sincerity :) parminder > > 2015-11-10 15:13 GMT-05:00 parminder >: > > Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I > have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! > > It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion > and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of > removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! > > parminder > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > > > > -- > Antonio Medina Gómez > Presidente > Asociación Colombiana de Usuarios de Internet > presidencia at acui.co > @amedinagomez > Skype amedinagomez > Celular 3118689626 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From joao.caribe at me.com Tue Nov 10 17:45:38 2015 From: joao.caribe at me.com (=?utf-8?Q? Jo=C3=A3o_Carlos_R._Carib=C3=A9 ?=) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 20:45:38 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] UN censored and banned Brazilian activists during IGF Message-ID: <6CB0E70F-D7D9-49D6-8F71-DC01BB386712@me.com> Direto do #IGF2015 In exercising their freedom of expression, activists from brazilian civil society organizations held a silent and peaceful protest during the opening session of the 10th Internet Governance Forum (#IGF2015), an event promoted by the UN and Comitê Gestor da Internet (CGIBr), in João Pessoa, the capital of Paraíba. The IGF – Internet Governance Forum participants took half a dozen posters and a banner to call attention to the defense of net neutrality and the risks that this principle for the free flow of information on the Internet has been suffering in Brazil and worldwide. There was also a banner protesting against the project financed by Facebook, the Internetorg. Protest against Internetorg at IGF is repressed by UN (youtube) The protest was repressed by the UN security guards, some of them using of physical strength. After that, the activists were filmed, photographed, some were pressured to show their cellphones and were surveilled during all the session, in an explicit act of intimidation and violation of their privacy. Beyond that, they also had their credentials photographed and withheld by security and were forbidden to participate at IGF> This kind of repression is incompatible inside an event that is precisely discussing how to protect freedom of speech at the Internet and how to guarantee privacy of those who use the world wide web. We demand that the credentials are returned and that the right of each and every one to express her and himself democratically be preserved in a United Nations event. We hope that the brazilian authorities manifest themselves to guarantee that the access of organizations and activists is not prevented. João Pessoa, november 10 2015. Articulação Marco Civil Já _ João Carlos Caribé (021) 9 8761 1967 Skype joaocaribe Enviado via iPad From kichango at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 17:46:35 2015 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:46:35 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah McTim, let us set up a time and get some popcorn for our own remote synchronic watching of Youtube pre-recorded IGF. M. plus, the webex app wants to be able to read all the websites you visit. I will just watch the youtube videos! On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Janna Anderson wrote: > I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – more than > ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep > getting notices that rooms aren’t available or not “active” when I can see > on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what’s > going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead – not even close > to a good alternative. > > Janna > > From: Sivasubramanian M > Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M > Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , > "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" , " > forum at justnetcoalition.org" > Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF > > Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from > Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the > IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? > password > > Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that > the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some > difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? > ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to > join easily. > > Sivasubramanian M > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 17:52:49 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 04:22:49 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Watching IGF on youtube is watching IGF on TV, and it is not remote participation, until such time as YouTube further innovates its video sharing platform into a full fledged interactive video platform. Remote participation needs to be feel almost as good as in room participation. Sivasubramanian M Sivasubramanian M On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:16 AM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Yeah McTim, let us set up a time and get some popcorn for our own remote > synchronic watching of Youtube pre-recorded IGF. > > M. > plus, the webex app wants to be able to read all the websites you visit. > > I will just watch the youtube videos! > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Janna Anderson wrote: > >> I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – more >> than ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep >> getting notices that rooms aren’t available or not “active” when I can see >> on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what’s >> going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead – not even close >> to a good alternative. >> >> Janna >> >> From: Sivasubramanian M >> Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M >> Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM >> To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , >> "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" , " >> forum at justnetcoalition.org" >> Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF >> >> Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from >> Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the >> IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? >> password >> >> Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that >> the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some >> difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? >> ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to >> join easily. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route > indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From raquino at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 17:53:17 2015 From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 19:53:17 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] UN censored and banned Brazilian activists during IGF In-Reply-To: <6CB0E70F-D7D9-49D6-8F71-DC01BB386712@me.com> References: <6CB0E70F-D7D9-49D6-8F71-DC01BB386712@me.com> Message-ID: One of the videos https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9cxyHqrl2k On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 7:45 PM, João Carlos R. Caribé wrote: > Direto do #IGF2015 > > In exercising their freedom of expression, activists from brazilian civil society organizations held a silent and peaceful protest during the opening session of the 10th Internet Governance Forum (#IGF2015), an event promoted by the UN and Comitê Gestor da Internet (CGIBr), in João Pessoa, the capital of Paraíba. > > The IGF – Internet Governance Forum participants took half a dozen posters and a banner to call attention to the defense of net neutrality and the risks that this principle for the free flow of information on the Internet has been suffering in Brazil and worldwide. There was also a banner protesting against the project financed by Facebook, the Internetorg. > > Protest against Internetorg at IGF is repressed by UN (youtube) > > The protest was repressed by the UN security guards, some of them using of physical strength. After that, the activists were filmed, photographed, some were pressured to show their cellphones and were surveilled during all the session, in an explicit act of intimidation and violation of their privacy. Beyond that, they also had their credentials photographed and withheld by security and were forbidden to participate at IGF> > > This kind of repression is incompatible inside an event that is precisely discussing how to protect freedom of speech at the Internet and how to guarantee privacy of those who use the world wide web. > > We demand that the credentials are returned and that the right of each and every one to express her and himself democratically be preserved in a United Nations event. We hope that the brazilian authorities manifest themselves to guarantee that the access of organizations and activists is not prevented. > > João Pessoa, november 10 2015. > > Articulação Marco Civil Já > > _ > João Carlos Caribé > (021) 9 8761 1967 > Skype joaocaribe > Enviado via iPad > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits From joly at punkcast.com Tue Nov 10 18:15:28 2015 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:15:28 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If following 3 or 4 different rooms on YouTube *and* webex both because one or other them keeps cutting out, with 3 other browsers open running the transcripts, plus skype twitter and jabber back channels, isn't remote participation, I don't know what is! :P [image: Inline image 1] On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Sivasubramanian M wrote: > Watching IGF on youtube is watching IGF on TV, and it is not remote > participation, until such time as YouTube further innovates its video > sharing platform into a full fledged interactive video platform. Remote > participation needs to be feel almost as good as in room participation. > > Sivasubramanian M > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:16 AM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > >> Yeah McTim, let us set up a time and get some popcorn for our own remote >> synchronic watching of Youtube pre-recorded IGF. >> >> M. >> plus, the webex app wants to be able to read all the websites you visit. >> >> I will just watch the youtube videos! >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Janna Anderson wrote: >> >>> I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – more >>> than ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep >>> getting notices that rooms aren’t available or not “active” when I can see >>> on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what’s >>> going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead – not even close >>> to a good alternative. >>> >>> Janna >>> >>> From: Sivasubramanian M >>> Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M >>> Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM >>> To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , >>> "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" , " >>> forum at justnetcoalition.org" >>> Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF >>> >>> Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from >>> Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the >>> IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? >>> password >>> >>> Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that >>> the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some >>> difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? >>> ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to >>> join easily. >>> >>> Sivasubramanian M >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >>> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> McTim >> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route >> indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DSC00982.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 1782312 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca Tue Nov 10 18:51:56 2015 From: stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca (Stephanie Perrin) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 18:51:56 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5642831C.2090306@mail.utoronto.ca> I am so glad to hear others expressing frustration....I had a really difficult time getting everything to work. Usually I assume that it is just me being klutzy with the interface, but this time really I don't think they could have made it harder if they tried. Very discouraging. Stephanie Perrin On 2015-11-10 17:46, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > Yeah McTim, let us set up a time and get some popcorn for our own > remote synchronic watching of Youtube pre-recorded IGF. > > M. > > plus, the webex app wants to be able to read all the websites you visit. > > I will just watch the youtube videos! > > On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Janna Anderson > wrote: > > I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – > more than ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting > people out. I keep getting notices that rooms aren’t available or > not “active” when I can see on Twitter that people are posting > photos and conversations about what’s going on inside them. I have > been watching Twitter instead – not even close to a good alternative. > > Janna > > From: Sivasubramanian M > > Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M > > Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org > " > >, "Bits > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net " > >, "forum at justnetcoalition.org > " > > Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF > > Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from > Registration in the intgovforum.org > website and as a participant in the IGF. The rooms are password > protected. Each room requires a separate? password > > Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was > told that the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably > have some difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an > entry password? ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is > set up for participants to join easily. > > Sivasubramanian M > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > > > > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 19:04:11 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 05:34:11 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Joly, Your desk looks more like a Remote Broadcasting Station than like a remote participation station. Even with such a luxurious desk and New York's broad bandwidth, you find it so difficult to participate. (The conference facility is new, so the Organizers do have some unusual difficulties, but nevertheless...) Sivasubramanian M On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:45 AM, Joly MacFie wrote: > If following 3 or 4 different rooms on YouTube *and* webex both because > one or other them keeps cutting out, with 3 other browsers open running the > transcripts, plus skype twitter and jabber back channels, isn't remote > participation, I don't know what is! :P > > [image: Inline image 1] > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Sivasubramanian M > wrote: > >> Watching IGF on youtube is watching IGF on TV, and it is not remote >> participation, until such time as YouTube further innovates its video >> sharing platform into a full fledged interactive video platform. Remote >> participation needs to be feel almost as good as in room participation. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:16 AM, Mawaki Chango >> wrote: >> >>> Yeah McTim, let us set up a time and get some popcorn for our own remote >>> synchronic watching of Youtube pre-recorded IGF. >>> >>> M. >>> plus, the webex app wants to be able to read all the websites you visit. >>> >>> I will just watch the youtube videos! >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Janna Anderson wrote: >>> >>>> I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – more >>>> than ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep >>>> getting notices that rooms aren’t available or not “active” when I can see >>>> on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what’s >>>> going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead – not even close >>>> to a good alternative. >>>> >>>> Janna >>>> >>>> From: Sivasubramanian M >>>> Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M >>>> Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM >>>> To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , >>>> "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net" , " >>>> forum at justnetcoalition.org" >>>> Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF >>>> >>>> Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from >>>> Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in >>>> the IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? >>>> password >>>> >>>> Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told >>>> that the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some >>>> difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? >>>> ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to >>>> join easily. >>>> >>>> Sivasubramanian M >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>>> >>>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >>>> >>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Cheers, >>> >>> McTim >>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A >>> route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> To be removed from the list, visit: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >>> >>> For all other list information and functions, see: >>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >>> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >>> >>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >>> >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: DSC00982.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 1782312 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jac at apcwomen.org Tue Nov 10 19:43:14 2015 From: jac at apcwomen.org (Jac sm Kee) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 08:43:14 +0800 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points raised in it. Radical. j - --------------------------------- Jac sm Kee Manager, Women's Rights Programme Association for Progressive Communications www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: > > > Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I > have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! > > It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion > and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of > removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! > > parminder > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ You > received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your > settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWQo8iAAoJEJuohLvI/Y6fs6AP/3kXXItUbCY1UUjpbHlZrS9w P2kztpi3qNV5AcbppSXxgOdEddu+Pvos3yft9X1aNEuvQ3vV2wF6EhTIseaBc1yn INS6WBbWoPtPOAWbrrhRXxm8xdkPID7e9j8Hg/ncEA9/5TCf98NDDylZUVykuSqX IIrTDvX5dbXia8Iu9UYvh6a+8MueL8dvi/MzYPadZgNdJK9DLvSyaWgF7cvISgDx hw8qRDu+O3InOftBN9a4Lzg2g+chzmr5srRhm6B3W6xGcUmtjzSZ0V/QHEfg1xYb XUzAMRyxponG5dX0Rx4i9KZrVZ+utj5iXc+GuGkq5j6TpjZ6xNFkIoMQ9p9AUAY3 zAfemv6s/lNeSQZZz5OLJ3tzOJ0p/dVaACs1kRs6B3uAu7NOWT1Nz3uv9mThvtkc Ua9/VgyMvFLQ0NhapOZ2S4a6FeBZKBzvGBEa87o0K6f7in8BgEQYyPQbqunSvKwq 13UMrWocZuEueZEu4xMMzb69/xBdzpxY50P+4tBSHybjWefKdLAA3t0Q/fdeJO9l 5aqts/8r721zCnRbm7zm1Uqe1kp0srwQvlCvMQMVME/XDH4QqoscNHEmuDQY6fPF fqKtMo+p4I2+y/oCBYPsALlmoOjLC1yfVj4Gy+q/lK+vJ2KiEzCKK4hWQsNemyZA h8nYfwx4Cz583MeqYpfh =PMnB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From deborah at apc.org Sun Nov 1 19:20:19 2015 From: deborah at apc.org (Deborah Brown) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 19:20:19 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5636AC43.6030908@apc.org> Congratulations to Joana and Nadz. I feel very happy to be represented by these lovely people. Deborah On 11/1/15 1:03 PM, Mishi Choudhary wrote: > Congratulations to the speakers! Looking forward to this. > > > > Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Marilia Maciel > Date: 11/1/2015 11:56 AM (GMT-06:00) > To: Jeanette Hofmann > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org, Best Bits > > Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil > society speakers at IGF > > Congratulations to the speakers and to CSCG! > > I agree with Carolina's diagnosis of the national problems. However, I > believe that the opening ceremony usually resonates more with > politicians and the media than the closing session. As Mike remarked, > it also sets the tone of the event, and I believe it is important that > national issues are raised whenever appropriate throughout the whole > meeting. For that, it is important that all stakeholders, from Brazil > and abroad, are aware of the problems. Joana's remarks could make sure > that they are. > > Best wishes, > Marília > > On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann > wrote: > > Hi Carolina, > > why would the closing ceremony be the better choice? Isn't better > for Joana to speak at the opening ceremony when national > politicians and the press are around? > > Jeanette > > > Am 31.10.15 um 18:31 schrieb Carolina Rossini: > > Good that you sent an updated bio Jo, I was about to do that > when I saw > Ian's email. > > I am very happy about the nominations, but I would invert the > order of > possible. Having a Brazilian at the end, as we had Grace and > Burcu as CS > for closing ceremony, is VERY important politically. > > Not just for CS, but actually more as a opportunity to have > the closing > speech also refer to national issues and ask specific > commitments from > the Brazilian policy makers there. As Joana is incredible > aware, since > she is deeply involved in the discussions, folks are trying to > puncture Marco Civil and cut back on other digital rights in > Brazil... > We - the digital rights community - lost a lot of attention > due to all > the political corruption that has take over all the media > attention. > > We need to have Joana - as a Brasilian - putting the "country" > against > the wall in front of everybody. And I feel the closing ceremony is > better for that purpose. > > I am saying all this without having spoken with Joana. So, I > am not sure > if she is available. > > But I wanted to make sure to leave my opinion on this issue. > > C > > On Friday, October 30, 2015, > >> > wrote: > > Thanks, Ian and everyone! > > I cannot express how honored I'm for this nomination. I > hope I can > respond to the task with the bright it entails. > > As soon as nomination is confirmed I will share a pad for > people to > bring inputs. Will already be dreaming with some insights. > > Just a correction in my institutional presentation as I'm > not CTS > for more then 1 and half year now :): > > I'm founder director and creative chaos catalyst of Coding > Rights, a > women lead think-and-do tank with the mission to bring > hackers, > geeks, artists, researchers and activists together to protect, > promote and mainstream digital rights and empower women on > ICTs. > More on @codingrights or codingrights.org > > (still temporary work in progress) > > Thank you once again and have safe travels to João Pessoa. > We will > be waiting for you all to cheer with caipirinhas or fresh > coconut > water. > > Kind regards, > > Joana > > On 30 Oct 2015 17:36, Lea Kaspar > ');>> wrote: > > Congratulations to both, proud to be represented by > these women. > > Many thanks to the CSCG for their work - excellent > choices. > > Best wishes, > Lea > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Ian Peter > > ');>> wrote: > > Below are the two nominations from Civil Society > Coordination Group for speakers for this years IGF > opening > and closing ceremonies. They were chosen from a > field of 20 > names submitted from various civil society > coalitions, and > have been forwarded to the IGF Secretariat. I must > say that > any of the 20 names submitted could have > represented us > admirably, and that it was a tough decision for > the CSCG > members to come up with 2 names. > Joana Varon (Brazil) – opening ceremony – > joana at varonferraz.com > Nadine Moawad (Lebanon) – closing ceremony – > nadine at apcwomen.org > For those who don’t know them, > Joana Varon Ferraz is a researcher and project > coordinator > at the Centre for Technology and Society from Fundação > Getulio Vargas in Rio de Janeiro > Nadine Moawad is a Lebanese feminist activist and > grasssroots worker who leads Association for > Progressive > Communication (APC)'s sexual > rights work. > We commend them both as informed excellent > communicators to > represent civil society. They have both been > informed of > their nominations. > Ian Peter (Independent Chair, Civil Society > Coordination Group) > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > > > ');>. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > -- > > /Carolina Rossini / > /Vice President, International Policy/ > *Public Knowledge* > _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_ > + 1 6176979389 | skype: > carolrossini | @carolinarossini > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > -- > *Marília Maciel* > Pesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito Rio > Researcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law > School > http://direitorio.fgv.br/cts > > DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.edu > PoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ > Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the > Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- Deborah Brown Senior Project Coordinator Association for Progressive Communications (APC) www.apc.org deborah at apc.org @deblebrown -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Tue Nov 10 22:55:47 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 00:55:47 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <5642553D.6000500@itforchange.net> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <5642553D.6000500@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Pretty much Parminder :-) <3 On Tuesday, November 10, 2015, parminder wrote: > > > On Wednesday 11 November 2015 01:55 AM, Antonio Medina Gómez wrote: > > Joana receives greetings, appreciation and respect for the firmness of your > words aimed at promoting economic and social development of citizens. > > > And that (just a ) tinge of nervousness gave it a warm extra human > dimension of deep sincerity :) > > parminder > > > 2015-11-10 15:13 GMT-05:00 parminder >: > >> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I have >> heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >> >> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion and >> evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of removal of the >> CS protesters... Bravo!! >> >> parminder >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> > > > -- > Antonio Medina Gómez > Presidente > Asociación Colombiana de Usuarios de Internet > presidencia at acui.co > @amedinagomez > Skype amedinagomez > Celular 3118689626 > > > -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IMG_0409.JPG Type: image/jpeg Size: 137888 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mishi at softwarefreedom.org Tue Nov 10 23:14:29 2015 From: mishi at softwarefreedom.org (Mishi Choudhary) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 23:14:29 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> Message-ID: <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> Joana, You rock! On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: > Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points > raised in it. > > Radical. > j > > > --------------------------------- > Jac sm Kee > Manager, Women's Rights Programme > Association for Progressive Communications > www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org > Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe > > On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: > > >> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! > >> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! > >> parminder > > > > >> ____________________________________________________________ You >> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Warm Regards Mishi Choudhary, Esq. Legal Director Software Freedom Law Center 1995 Broadway Floor 17 New York, NY-10023 (tel) 212-461-1912 (fax) 212-580-0898 www.softwarefreedom.org Executive Director SFLC.IN K-9, Second Floor Jangpura Extn. New Delhi-110014 (tel) +91-11-43587126 (fax) +91-11-24323530 www.sflc.in -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From nashton at consensus.pro Wed Nov 11 02:34:20 2015 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 08:34:20 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF In-Reply-To: <5642831C.2090306@mail.utoronto.ca> References: <5642831C.2090306@mail.utoronto.ca> Message-ID: The history of tech at IGFs is in my experience a pretty unhappy one. As long as the IGF has little funding to stage its meetings things like this will always be difficult. Unfortunately. > On 11 Nov 2015, at 00:51, Stephanie Perrin wrote: > > I am so glad to hear others expressing frustration....I had a really difficult time getting everything to work. Usually I assume that it is just me being klutzy with the interface, but this time really I don't think they could have made it harder if they tried. Very discouraging. > Stephanie Perrin > > On 2015-11-10 17:46, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> Yeah McTim, let us set up a time and get some popcorn for our own remote synchronic watching of Youtube pre-recorded IGF. >> >> M. >> >> plus, the webex app wants to be able to read all the websites you visit. >> >> I will just watch the youtube videos! >> >> On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Janna Anderson > wrote: >> I agree that there’s too much of a bar to remote participation – more than ever before for IGF - and it is definitely cutting people out. I keep getting notices that rooms aren’t available or not “active” when I can see on Twitter that people are posting photos and conversations about what’s going on inside them. I have been watching Twitter instead – not even close to a good alternative. >> >> Janna >> >> From: Sivasubramanian M > >> Reply-To: Sivasubramanian M > >> Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 1:38 PM >> To: " governance at lists.igcaucus.org " >, "Bits bestbits at lists.bestbits.net " >, "forum at justnetcoalition.org " > >> Subject: [bestbits] Ease of Remote Participation in the Brazil IGF >> >> Remote Participation requires a separate registration apart from Registration in the intgovforum.org website and as a participant in the IGF. The rooms are password protected. Each room requires a separate? password >> >> Once in the room, I find that the audio does not work. ( I was told that the Conference room is new, so the organizers probably have some difficulties here ) But why would the rooms require an entry password? ICANN's remote participation, in comparison, is set up for participants to join easily. >> >> Sivasubramanian M >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Cheers, >> >> McTim >> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> To be removed from the list, visit: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing >> >> For all other list information and functions, see: >> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance >> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: >> http://www.igcaucus.org/ >> >> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 670 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: From raquino at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 09:32:29 2015 From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:32:29 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists Message-ID: Update on Brazilian activists banned from #IGF2015 Their badge has been returned! UN has reconsidered the issue, thanks to all who contributed w/ the negotiation From james at cyberinvasion.net Wed Nov 11 10:10:48 2015 From: james at cyberinvasion.net (James Gannon) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:10:48 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> Message-ID: <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net> The Raw transcript of the speech is available here and copied below http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2318-2015-11-10-opening-ceremony-main-meeting-room >> MODERATOR: , the next speaker is Joana Varon Ferraz. >> JOANA VARON FERRAZ: Hello, all protocols have been addressed. I would like to extend my general greetings for all the participants. And correct my affiliation. I'm actually researcher and human rights advocate, and founder director of coding rights which is a female organisation focused in advancing the enforcement of human rights in the digital world by integrating usages and understandings of technology into policymaking process. I have to say a few weeks ago, we were surprised by a E mail saying that I've been nominated by my colleagues for this Opening Session. When I got the news, the first thing that crossed my mind were memories from when I attended my first IGF back in 2007. Here in Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro. It was just nine years ago, but as much as I changed, I got some trust from Civil Society colleagues that nominated me to be here today, the Internet has also changed a lot. And we have great innovations, more people connected, indeed, different kind of smart devices, but I'm concerned. The Internet was built with the core value of connectivity to be open, interoperable. But our Internet is becoming more and more centralized. Sometimes, by the action of governments, but mostly by market powers. That aspect poses problems to those core values that were originally embedded in the architecture of the Internet poses problems, protection and promotion of human rights, and also represents challenges to the Internet Governance processes. Particularly concerning, how we address our endless search for the beloved utopia of a Democratic multistakeholder participation. Mostly considering this from the mental power imbalances within the various stakeholder groups, some concerns, human rights and from the mental technical values for the Internet architecture, like end to end interoperability, confidentiality and many others are being solved, in this progressively more centralized Internet, coined by profit and control. I give some examples of such centralization trends. In terms of connectivity, for instance, at least in developing countries or emerging economies, connectivities are still centralized in the hands of very few telecommunication companies. We need to discuss alternatives to this such as public regime for Internet services, discuss free spectrum, usage of cognitive radios. We have technologies for that. And I was glad that there was a particular plenary addressing this issue in this edition of IGF already. Furthermore, we need to understand that Zero Rating practices are not the solution to the digital divide. There are people, particularly from developing countries, that practically only access one service and think it's Internet. Imagine if this perception would escalate. So, please let's not sell donkeys pretending they are horses, Internet org is not Internet, free basics is not free, we are paying for it. It is more like (applause). It's more like you are basically getting free of your rights, the right to access global and free Internet. So, we not only need open connectivity. We also really need implementable net neutrality, and in particular the representatives, Brazilian Government representatives that are here, I'd like to ask for them to please consider that there is a urgency to have a regulation of Marco Civil that decree that hopefully would set the tone about that. Marco Civil was an example in terms of process and content worldwide, but without regulation, it is in danger, mostly by market practices. Another example of decentralization is related to freedom of expression and privacy. A Special Rapporteur David Kaye said today and I find appealing, why are we reading a newspaper, the newspapers today, the newspapers is also reading us. All this data, data, our digital shadow, our powerful tool, that can be used against us, either by framing us, framing our will, or to be used for pressure or clashing groups of descent. So while we have never been more connected, we have also never been so exposed as in the digital world, and pervasive surveillance, weak enforcement for data protection or discourse of Cybersecurity and terrorism does not make the perspectives very good. We need strong and enforceable data protection views and here I call attention again to the situation in Brazil, we need to deliver our data protection bill. There was a result of a public consultation to the legislative, they have to approve as soon as possible so we have coherence with national and international agenda in the protection of digital rights or privacy rights. We also need to understand and ensure that encryption and anonymity can and should be preserved. We need to solve jurisdictional conflicts to ensure that protection of freedom of expression and privacy are not dependent on companies. We need to move forward with transparent and accountable IANA transition towards a global system. And beyond, policy approaches to human rights, we need to inform these principles for the development of technology. Technology is not neutral. We need to consider that what does it mean to have human rights considerations for standards and protocols. We need to foster free software as it has been said in sessions here, if we cannot see, we cannot trust it. We need to work more closely to technical community to understand or at least expose the implications about what they do, and human rights. Finally, we need more women and more diversity within those who develop technologies. (applause). And create policies for technologies. This imbalance is already very expressive in this Opening Session, in which you can count four women. So to wrap my points, all this list of issues that can be developed further and further, represent the challenges that are increasing, to protect and promote human rights and the core values of the architecture of the Internet in face of decentralization. My final consideration for us to have in mind is, what is the Internet Governance system that can address all this? What is the role of IGF facing these issues? IGF is indeed a unique space for multistakeholder dialogue. But we need to fulfill them in data of IGF as provided in the Tunis Agenda. We are currently in the process of reviewing the WSIS+10, where this issue can be addressed. But the renewal of IGF cannot be used as a maintenance of the status quo, in which the Internet Governance ecosystem remains the same. No one can solve the issues that I have raised so far. The Internet that we were discussing during WSIS process in 2003 and 5, and later on here in Brazil in IGF 2017 is not the same. The challenges to maintaining a free, open and decentralized network have never been bigger, and the solution is related to access, whether the institutional arrangements that we built are able to protect and promote human rights, and enable us to maintain technical values that inspire the creation of the Internet. I hope in these days to come, we can discuss this and other issues further, with all the reasons they require but not only discuss really, let us also protest freely. This is also political space. I've been looking and saw some Civil Society representatives are being harassed and taken out of the venue by due to attempt of silent protest around free basics. It is a bit unacceptable in a context in which we are discussing free speech. So please, let's let people who cannot be on the stage also symbolically express their key questions regarding the future of Internet in front of high level panels like this. I hope this issue can be solved quickly. Finally, let us also use this space to think what institutional arrangements are needed to move forward beyond the status quo, in order to reverse the strength of centralization of the Internet. Let us try to put at least many of the beautiful words that were said here and look good in paper, in practice, towards a real people centered, open, free, global and inclusive Internet. Thank you so much. (applause). Congrats! -James On 11/11/2015, 1:14 a.m., "bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net on behalf of Mishi Choudhary" wrote: >Joana, > >You rock! > >On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: >> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points >> raised in it. >> >> Radical. >> j >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> Jac sm Kee >> Manager, Women's Rights Programme >> Association for Progressive Communications >> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org >> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe >> >> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: >> >> >>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >> >>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! >> >>> parminder >> >> >> >> >>> ____________________________________________________________ You >>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > >-- >Warm Regards >Mishi Choudhary, Esq. >Legal Director >Software Freedom Law Center >1995 Broadway Floor 17 >New York, NY-10023 >(tel) 212-461-1912 >(fax) 212-580-0898 >www.softwarefreedom.org > > >Executive Director >SFLC.IN >K-9, Second Floor >Jangpura Extn. >New Delhi-110014 >(tel) +91-11-43587126 >(fax) +91-11-24323530 >www.sflc.in > > From juca at members.fsf.org Wed Nov 11 10:32:32 2015 From: juca at members.fsf.org (Felipe Sanches) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 13:32:32 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Now I hope they raise their banners again :-) "Paz sem voz é medo" (Peace without voice is fear) On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro wrote: > Update on Brazilian activists banned from #IGF2015 Their badge has > been returned! UN has reconsidered the issue, thanks to all who > contributed w/ the negotiation > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From walid.al-saqaf at ims.su.se Wed Nov 11 10:18:30 2015 From: walid.al-saqaf at ims.su.se (Walid AL-SAQAF) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:18:30 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net> Message-ID: Well said Joana, I wish too to have more brave and informed women like you as active players in the Internet sphere. Sincerely, Walid ------ Walid Al-Saqaf, PhD Postdoc, Department of Media Studies Stockholm University - Sweden On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:10 PM, James Gannon wrote: > The Raw transcript of the speech is available here and copied below > > http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2318-2015-11-10-opening-ceremony-main-meeting-room > > >>> MODERATOR: , the next speaker is Joana Varon Ferraz. >>> JOANA VARON FERRAZ: Hello, all protocols have been addressed. I would like to extend my general greetings for all the participants. And correct my affiliation. I'm actually researcher and human rights advocate, and founder director of coding rights which is a female organisation focused in advancing the enforcement of human rights in the digital world by integrating usages and understandings of technology into policymaking process. > I have to say a few weeks ago, we were surprised by a E mail saying that I've been nominated by my colleagues for this Opening Session. When I got the news, the first thing that crossed my mind were memories from when I attended my first IGF back in 2007. Here in Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro. > It was just nine years ago, but as much as I changed, I got some trust from Civil Society colleagues that nominated me to be here today, the Internet has also changed a lot. And we have great innovations, more people connected, indeed, different kind of smart devices, but I'm concerned. The Internet was built with the core value of connectivity to be open, interoperable. > But our Internet is becoming more and more centralized. Sometimes, by the action of governments, but mostly by market powers. That aspect poses problems to those core values that were originally embedded in the architecture of the Internet poses problems, protection and promotion of human rights, and also represents challenges to the Internet Governance processes. > Particularly concerning, how we address our endless search for the beloved utopia of a Democratic multistakeholder participation. > Mostly considering this from the mental power imbalances within the various stakeholder groups, some concerns, human rights and from the mental technical values for the Internet architecture, like end to end interoperability, confidentiality and many others are being solved, in this progressively more centralized Internet, coined by profit and control. > I give some examples of such centralization trends. In terms of connectivity, for instance, at least in developing countries or emerging economies, connectivities are still centralized in the hands of very few telecommunication companies. We need to discuss alternatives to this such as public regime for Internet services, discuss free spectrum, usage of cognitive radios. We have technologies for that. And I was glad that there was a particular plenary addressing this issue in this edition of IGF already. > Furthermore, we need to understand that Zero Rating practices are not the solution to the digital divide. There are people, particularly from developing countries, that practically only access one service and think it's Internet. > Imagine if this perception would escalate. So, please let's not sell donkeys pretending they are horses, Internet org is not Internet, free basics is not free, we are paying for it. > It is more like > (applause). > It's more like you are basically getting free of your rights, the right to access global and free Internet. > So, we not only need open connectivity. We also really need implementable net neutrality, and in particular the representatives, Brazilian Government representatives that are here, I'd like to ask for them to please consider that there is a urgency to have a regulation of Marco Civil that decree that hopefully would set the tone about that. > Marco Civil was an example in terms of process and content worldwide, but without regulation, it is in danger, mostly by market practices. > Another example of decentralization is related to freedom of expression and privacy. A Special Rapporteur David Kaye said today and I find appealing, why are we reading a newspaper, the newspapers today, the newspapers is also reading us. All this data, data, our digital shadow, our powerful tool, that can be used against us, either by framing us, framing our will, or to be used for pressure or clashing groups of descent. > So while we have never been more connected, we have also never been so exposed as in the digital world, and pervasive surveillance, weak enforcement for data protection or discourse of Cybersecurity and terrorism does not make the perspectives very good. We need strong and enforceable data protection views and here I call attention again to the situation in Brazil, we need to deliver our data protection bill. There was a result of a public consultation to the legislative, they have to approve as soon as possible so we have coherence with national and international agenda in the protection of digital rights or privacy rights. > We also need to understand and ensure that encryption and anonymity can and should be preserved. We need to solve jurisdictional conflicts to ensure that protection of freedom of expression and privacy are not dependent on companies. We need to move forward with transparent and accountable IANA transition towards a global system. > And beyond, policy approaches to human rights, we need to inform these principles for the development of technology. Technology is not neutral. We need to consider that what does it mean to have human rights considerations for standards and protocols. > We need to foster free software as it has been said in sessions here, if we cannot see, we cannot trust it. > We need to work more closely to technical community to understand or at least expose the implications about what they do, and human rights. > Finally, we need more women and more diversity within those who develop technologies. > (applause). > And create policies for technologies. This imbalance is already very expressive in this Opening Session, in which you can count four women. > So to wrap my points, all this list of issues that can be developed further and further, represent the challenges that are increasing, to protect and promote human rights and the core values of the architecture of the Internet in face of decentralization. > My final consideration for us to have in mind is, what is the Internet Governance system that can address all this? What is the role of IGF facing these issues? > IGF is indeed a unique space for multistakeholder dialogue. But we need to fulfill them in data of IGF as provided in the Tunis Agenda. We are currently in the process of reviewing the WSIS+10, where this issue can be addressed. > But the renewal of IGF cannot be used as a maintenance of the status quo, in which the Internet Governance ecosystem remains the same. No one can solve the issues that I have raised so far. The Internet that we were discussing during WSIS process in 2003 and 5, and later on here in Brazil in IGF 2017 is not the same. > The challenges to maintaining a free, open and decentralized network have never been bigger, and the solution is related to access, whether the institutional arrangements that we built are able to protect and promote human rights, and enable us to maintain technical values that inspire the creation of the Internet. > I hope in these days to come, we can discuss this and other issues further, with all the reasons they require but not only discuss really, let us also protest freely. This is also political space. I've been looking and saw some Civil Society representatives are being harassed and taken out of the venue by due to attempt of silent protest around free basics. It is a bit unacceptable in a context in which we are discussing free speech. > So please, let's let people who cannot be on the stage also symbolically express their key questions regarding the future of Internet in front of high level panels like this. > I hope this issue can be solved quickly. > Finally, let us also use this space to think what institutional arrangements are needed to move forward beyond the status quo, in order to reverse the strength of centralization of the Internet. Let us try to put at least many of the beautiful words that were said here and look good in paper, in practice, towards a real people centered, open, free, global and inclusive Internet. > Thank you so much. > (applause). > > > > Congrats! > > -James > > > > > On 11/11/2015, 1:14 a.m., "bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net on behalf of Mishi Choudhary" wrote: > >>Joana, >> >>You rock! >> >>On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: >>> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points >>> raised in it. >>> >>> Radical. >>> j >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------- >>> Jac sm Kee >>> Manager, Women's Rights Programme >>> Association for Progressive Communications >>> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org >>> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe >>> >>> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >>>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >>> >>>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >>>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >>>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! >>> >>>> parminder >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ You >>>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >>>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> >>-- >>Warm Regards >>Mishi Choudhary, Esq. >>Legal Director >>Software Freedom Law Center >>1995 Broadway Floor 17 >>New York, NY-10023 >>(tel) 212-461-1912 >>(fax) 212-580-0898 >>www.softwarefreedom.org >> >> >>Executive Director >>SFLC.IN >>K-9, Second Floor >>Jangpura Extn. >>New Delhi-110014 >>(tel) +91-11-43587126 >>(fax) +91-11-24323530 >>www.sflc.in >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits From ellerygv at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 09:25:31 2015 From: ellerygv at gmail.com (Ellery Biddle) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 09:25:31 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> Message-ID: <56434FDB.5060708@gmail.com> Where's the video?!? So sorry I'm not there! Mishi Choudhary wrote: > Joana, > > You rock! > > On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: >> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points >> raised in it. >> >> Radical. >> j >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> Jac sm Kee >> Manager, Women's Rights Programme >> Association for Progressive Communications >> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org >> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe >> >> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: >> >> >>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! >>> parminder >> >> >> >>> ____________________________________________________________ You >>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- Ellery Roberts Biddle Global Voices, Advocacy Director @ellerybiddle -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 906 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Nov 11 10:49:51 2015 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos Afonso) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:49:51 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> I do hope they do not. This caused a huge problem for all of us (civil society here at the IGF). We had (event organizers, the BR gov, CGI.br) a very hard time to have the UN revert the decision to reinstate the credentials and not to suspend others. Now the UN is checking bags for "harmful or suspicious" content. There are several forms of advocacy and manifestation, and some may do more harm than good. Unfortunately this was one case. Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules because they were not published. fraternal regards --c.a. On 11-11-15 12:32, Felipe Sanches wrote: > Now I hope they raise their banners again :-) > > "Paz sem voz é medo" (Peace without voice is fear) > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro > > wrote: > > Update on Brazilian activists banned from #IGF2015 Their badge has > been returned! UN has reconsidered the issue, thanks to all who > contributed w/ the negotiation > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Carlos A. Afonso Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br CGI.br - http://cgi.br GPG 0x9EE8F8E3 Fingerprint EB2C 8F4B 1C68 8BB7 B6EC 9413 1FE5 1BB0 9EE8 F8E3 From jmalcolm at eff.org Wed Nov 11 10:57:20 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 12:57:20 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> References: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <56436560.1050306@eff.org> On 11/11/2015 12:49 PM, Carlos Afonso wrote: > Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs > section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules because > they were not published. Last time we did argue that, and we were correct because the rules had not been published. Their publication on the website now is a result of that. I don't disagree with what you say above, but one could fault both with the UN Secretariat's selectivity in its enforcement of its rules, and also its inflexibility in refusing to even opening a dialogue about revising them. -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ggithaiga at hotmail.com Mon Nov 2 05:20:56 2015 From: ggithaiga at hotmail.com (Grace Githaiga) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 10:20:56 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF In-Reply-To: References: <329E4D25FA9741FBA266911DB82F76DD@Toshiba> , ,<5635446A.10701@wzb.eu>, Message-ID: + 1 From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 15:56:19 -0200 To: jeanette at wzb.eu CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] CSCG nominations for civil society speakers at IGF Congratulations to the speakers and to CSCG! I agree with Carolina's diagnosis of the national problems. However, I believe that the opening ceremony usually resonates more with politicians and the media than the closing session. As Mike remarked, it also sets the tone of the event, and I believe it is important that national issues are raised whenever appropriate throughout the whole meeting. For that, it is important that all stakeholders, from Brazil and abroad, are aware of the problems. Joana's remarks could make sure that they are. Best wishes,Marília On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Jeanette Hofmann wrote: Hi Carolina, why would the closing ceremony be the better choice? Isn't better for Joana to speak at the opening ceremony when national politicians and the press are around? Jeanette Am 31.10.15 um 18:31 schrieb Carolina Rossini: Good that you sent an updated bio Jo, I was about to do that when I saw Ian's email. I am very happy about the nominations, but I would invert the order of possible. Having a Brazilian at the end, as we had Grace and Burcu as CS for closing ceremony, is VERY important politically. Not just for CS, but actually more as a opportunity to have the closing speech also refer to national issues and ask specific commitments from the Brazilian policy makers there. As Joana is incredible aware, since she is deeply involved in the discussions, folks are trying to puncture Marco Civil and cut back on other digital rights in Brazil... We - the digital rights community - lost a lot of attention due to all the political corruption that has take over all the media attention. We need to have Joana - as a Brasilian - putting the "country" against the wall in front of everybody. And I feel the closing ceremony is better for that purpose. I am saying all this without having spoken with Joana. So, I am not sure if she is available. But I wanted to make sure to leave my opinion on this issue. C On Friday, October 30, 2015, > wrote: Thanks, Ian and everyone! I cannot express how honored I'm for this nomination. I hope I can respond to the task with the bright it entails. As soon as nomination is confirmed I will share a pad for people to bring inputs. Will already be dreaming with some insights. Just a correction in my institutional presentation as I'm not CTS for more then 1 and half year now :): I'm founder director and creative chaos catalyst of Coding Rights, a women lead think-and-do tank with the mission to bring hackers, geeks, artists, researchers and activists together to protect, promote and mainstream digital rights and empower women on ICTs. More on @codingrights or codingrights.org (still temporary work in progress) Thank you once again and have safe travels to João Pessoa. We will be waiting for you all to cheer with caipirinhas or fresh coconut water. Kind regards, Joana On 30 Oct 2015 17:36, Lea Kaspar > wrote: Congratulations to both, proud to be represented by these women. Many thanks to the CSCG for their work - excellent choices. Best wishes, Lea On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 7:15 PM, Ian Peter > wrote: Below are the two nominations from Civil Society Coordination Group for speakers for this years IGF opening and closing ceremonies. They were chosen from a field of 20 names submitted from various civil society coalitions, and have been forwarded to the IGF Secretariat. I must say that any of the 20 names submitted could have represented us admirably, and that it was a tough decision for the CSCG members to come up with 2 names. Joana Varon (Brazil) – opening ceremony – joana at varonferraz.com Nadine Moawad (Lebanon) – closing ceremony – nadine at apcwomen.org For those who don’t know them, Joana Varon Ferraz is a researcher and project coordinator at the Centre for Technology and Society from Fundação Getulio Vargas in Rio de Janeiro Nadine Moawad is a Lebanese feminist activist and grasssroots worker who leads Association for Progressive Communication (APC)'s sexual rights work. We commend them both as informed excellent communicators to represent civil society. They have both been informed of their nominations. Ian Peter (Independent Chair, Civil Society Coordination Group) ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- /Carolina Rossini / /Vice President, International Policy/ *Public Knowledge* _http://www.publicknowledge.org/_ + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- Marília MacielPesquisadora Gestora - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - FGV Direito RioResearcher and Coordinator - Center for Technology & Society - FGV Law Schoolhttp://direitorio.fgv.br/cts DiploFoundation associate - www.diplomacy.eduPoliTICs Magazine Advisory Committee - http://www.politics.org.br/ Subscribe "Digital Rights: Latin America & the Caribbean" - http://www.digitalrightslac.net/en ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 12:17:38 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 22:47:38 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Happening Now at Workshop Room 3: 6th meeting of the Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values Message-ID: Hello Please join us at the meeting. Thank you Sivasubramanian M On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Sivasubramanian M wrote: > Hello All, > > Please join the 6th meeting of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet > Values at Workshop Room 3 on 11th November, 14 00 - 15 30 hours. This > dynamic coalition on Core Internet Values was formed following the > "Workshop on Fundamentals: Core Internet Values" held during the 2009 IGF > at Egypt, chaired by the Internet Society Past President Lynn St.Amour. The > Coalition has met during the five IGFs that followed Egypt and its sixth > meeting is at Brazil, to be chaired by Olivier Crepin Le-Blond. > > The pursuit of the Coalition in general is to work towards causing the > Internet to evolve in such a manner that its Core Values are not > compromised. The stakeholders to Internet Governance might share the view > that the Internet remains Global as One Internet, Open, Free, end to end so > as to foster Global Access, Permission-less Innovation and Global > Prosperity. > > The sub-theme of the 6th meeting in particular is : "Core Internet Values > as a Reference Standard for Global Internet Policy". > > This would be to discuss the thought that the organizations responsible > for components of Internet Governance including large Internet > Organizations, Governments and Civil Society organizations could > formulate/contribute to formulate Internet policy in a manner that the > Internet does not slip away from Core Internet Values. > > Panellists: > > Kathryn Brown, President and CEO of the Internet Society > Paul Wilson, Director General of APNIC > Erica Mann, Member, Board of Directors, ICANN > Carlton Anthony Samuels, former Member of the At-Large Advisory Committee > Mark Carvell, Representative of the United Kingdom at the Governmental > Advisory Committee of ICANN > Olivier Crepin Le-Blond, Past Chair of the ICANN At-Large Advisory > Committee > > If you are in Brazil for the IGF, please join the discussions at Workshop > Room 3 on 11th November during 14 00 hours - 15 30 hours. > > Thank you > Sivasubramanian M > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lordmwesh at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 12:15:42 2015 From: lordmwesh at gmail.com (Mwendwa Kivuva) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 20:15:42 +0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: <56436560.1050306@eff.org> References: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> <56436560.1050306@eff.org> Message-ID: Can the rules be subjected to multistakeholder consultations? On Nov 11, 2015 12:57 PM, "Jeremy Malcolm" wrote: > On 11/11/2015 12:49 PM, Carlos Afonso wrote: > > Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs > > section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules because > > they were not published. > > Last time we did argue that, and we were correct because the rules had > not been published. Their publication on the website now is a result of > that. > > I don't disagree with what you say above, but one could fault both with > the UN Secretariat's selectivity in its enforcement of its rules, and > also its inflexibility in refusing to even opening a dialogue about > revising them. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Global Policy Analyst > Electronic Frontier Foundation > https://eff.org > jmalcolm at eff.org > > Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 > > :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: > > Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt > PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 > OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD > > Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Wed Nov 11 12:31:21 2015 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Mwendwa Kivuva) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 20:31:21 +0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: <56436560.1050306@eff.org> References: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> <56436560.1050306@eff.org> Message-ID: Can the rules be subjected to multistakeholder consultations? On Nov 11, 2015 12:57 PM, "Jeremy Malcolm" wrote: > On 11/11/2015 12:49 PM, Carlos Afonso wrote: > > Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs > > section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules because > > they were not published. > > Last time we did argue that, and we were correct because the rules had > not been published. Their publication on the website now is a result of > that. > > I don't disagree with what you say above, but one could fault both with > the UN Secretariat's selectivity in its enforcement of its rules, and > also its inflexibility in refusing to even opening a dialogue about > revising them. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Global Policy Analyst > Electronic Frontier Foundation > https://eff.org > jmalcolm at eff.org > > Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 > > :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: > > Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt > PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 > OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD > > Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jozef.halbersztadt at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 12:46:04 2015 From: jozef.halbersztadt at gmail.com (Halbersztadt Jozef (jothal)) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 18:46:04 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <56434FDB.5060708@gmail.com> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> <56434FDB.5060708@gmail.com> Message-ID: Do you know why they cut the beginning? In other languages (eg Russian) is OK. https://youtu.be/RNXOtdXuT44?t=2h14m11 JH On 11 November 2015 at 15:25, Ellery Biddle wrote: > Where's the video?!? So sorry I'm not there! > > Mishi Choudhary wrote: >> Joana, >> >> You rock! >> >> On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: >>> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points >>> raised in it. >>> >>> Radical. >>> j >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------- >>> Jac sm Kee >>> Manager, Women's Rights Programme >>> Association for Progressive Communications >>> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org >>> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe >>> >>> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >>>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >>>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >>>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >>>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! >>>> parminder >>> >>> >>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ You >>>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >>>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > -- > Ellery Roberts Biddle > Global Voices, Advocacy Director > @ellerybiddle > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -- jozef [dot] halbersztadt [at] gmail [dot] com Internet Society Poland http://www.isoc.org.pl pubkey&address: http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?search=0x6A332CA03C4ACB9A From chinmayiarun at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 13:16:21 2015 From: chinmayiarun at gmail.com (Chinmayi Arun) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 23:46:21 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] =?UTF-8?Q?IGF_invitation=3A_Tomorrow_=289_am=29_-_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=98Hate_=26_Dangerous_Speech_Online=27_round_table?= Message-ID: Dear All, We would like to invite you to our IGF Roundtable on *‘Hate & Dangerous Speech Online: Identification & Strategies’* on *12**th** November* 2015 (Thursday) from* 9:00 am – 10.30 am *at *Workshop Room - 10*. Professor Urs Gasser, Executive Director of the Berkman Centre for Internet & Society at Harvard University will moderate the session. This is an event that we are co-hosting with the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University, the Digital Asia Hub, Dangerous Speech Project, Digital Rights Foundation, Pakistan and Dr. Cherian George. Recently several recent incidents of violence in South Asia have been attributed to online hate speech. We are looking to bring together diverse perspectives on this very serious issue. A document with the detailed session outline and schedule is attached to this email, and additional details about the event are given below. If you have any questions please do let us know. We hope that many of you will join us on the 12th. Best, Chinmayi *A Roundtable on* *Hate & Dangerous Speech Online: Identification & Strategies* 9:00 am – 10.30 am, 12th November 2015 *at* *Workshop Room - 10* *organised by* *The Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University* *The Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University, Delhi* *The Dangerous Speech Project* *The Digital Asia Hub* *Digital Rights Foundation, Pakistan* *&* *Dr. Cherian George* *Moderator: Professor Urs Gasser**, Executive Director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: (IGF) Roundtable on Hate & Dangerous Speech Online.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 76321 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Nov 11 13:16:03 2015 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos Afonso) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:16:03 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: References: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> <56436560.1050306@eff.org> Message-ID: <564385E3.3010902@cafonso.ca> Dear Mwenda & Jeremy, actually the issue, to my knowledge, was never brought to the attention of the MAG - please do correct me if I am wrong. I think the MAG process is the channel through which the specific territorial rules for IGF should be redefined - after all, it is a multistakeholder event, not just a multilateral one. fraternal regards --c.a. On 11-11-15 14:31, Mwendwa Kivuva wrote: > Can the rules be subjected to multistakeholder consultations? > > On Nov 11, 2015 12:57 PM, "Jeremy Malcolm" > wrote: > > On 11/11/2015 12:49 PM, Carlos Afonso wrote: > > Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs > > section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules > because > > they were not published. > > Last time we did argue that, and we were correct because the rules had > not been published. Their publication on the website now is a result of > that. > > I don't disagree with what you say above, but one could fault both with > the UN Secretariat's selectivity in its enforcement of its rules, and > also its inflexibility in refusing to even opening a dialogue about > revising them. > > -- > Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Global Policy Analyst > Electronic Frontier Foundation > https://eff.org > jmalcolm at eff.org > > Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 > > :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: > > Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt > PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 > OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD > > Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: > https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net . > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Carlos A. Afonso Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br CGI.br - http://cgi.br GPG 0x9EE8F8E3 Fingerprint EB2C 8F4B 1C68 8BB7 B6EC 9413 1FE5 1BB0 9EE8 F8E3 From jmalcolm at eff.org Wed Nov 11 13:22:24 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:22:24 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: <564385E3.3010902@cafonso.ca> References: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> <56436560.1050306@eff.org> <564385E3.3010902@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <56438760.3060600@eff.org> On 11/11/2015 3:16 PM, Carlos Afonso wrote: > Dear Mwenda & Jeremy, actually the issue, to my knowledge, was never > brought to the attention of the MAG - please do correct me if I am wrong. > > I think the MAG process is the channel through which the specific > territorial rules for IGF should be redefined - after all, it is a > multistakeholder event, not just a multilateral one. Well I agree, but I'm pretty sure UNOG doesn't. -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ggithaiga at hotmail.com Wed Nov 11 13:28:46 2015 From: ggithaiga at hotmail.com (Grace Githaiga) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 18:28:46 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net>,<56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net>, Message-ID: Joana, you were great! From: walid.al-saqaf at ims.su.se Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 16:18:30 +0100 To: joana at varonferraz.com CC: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech Well said Joana, I wish too to have more brave and informed women like you as active players in the Internet sphere. Sincerely, Walid ------ Walid Al-Saqaf, PhD Postdoc, Department of Media Studies Stockholm University - Sweden On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:10 PM, James Gannon wrote: > The Raw transcript of the speech is available here and copied below > > http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2318-2015-11-10-opening-ceremony-main-meeting-room > > >>> MODERATOR: , the next speaker is Joana Varon Ferraz. >>> JOANA VARON FERRAZ: Hello, all protocols have been addressed. I would like to extend my general greetings for all the participants. And correct my affiliation. I'm actually researcher and human rights advocate, and founder director of coding rights which is a female organisation focused in advancing the enforcement of human rights in the digital world by integrating usages and understandings of technology into policymaking process. > I have to say a few weeks ago, we were surprised by a E mail saying that I've been nominated by my colleagues for this Opening Session. When I got the news, the first thing that crossed my mind were memories from when I attended my first IGF back in 2007. Here in Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro. > It was just nine years ago, but as much as I changed, I got some trust from Civil Society colleagues that nominated me to be here today, the Internet has also changed a lot. And we have great innovations, more people connected, indeed, different kind of smart devices, but I'm concerned. The Internet was built with the core value of connectivity to be open, interoperable. > But our Internet is becoming more and more centralized. Sometimes, by the action of governments, but mostly by market powers. That aspect poses problems to those core values that were originally embedded in the architecture of the Internet poses problems, protection and promotion of human rights, and also represents challenges to the Internet Governance processes. > Particularly concerning, how we address our endless search for the beloved utopia of a Democratic multistakeholder participation. > Mostly considering this from the mental power imbalances within the various stakeholder groups, some concerns, human rights and from the mental technical values for the Internet architecture, like end to end interoperability, confidentiality and many others are being solved, in this progressively more centralized Internet, coined by profit and control. > I give some examples of such centralization trends. In terms of connectivity, for instance, at least in developing countries or emerging economies, connectivities are still centralized in the hands of very few telecommunication companies. We need to discuss alternatives to this such as public regime for Internet services, discuss free spectrum, usage of cognitive radios. We have technologies for that. And I was glad that there was a particular plenary addressing this issue in this edition of IGF already. > Furthermore, we need to understand that Zero Rating practices are not the solution to the digital divide. There are people, particularly from developing countries, that practically only access one service and think it's Internet. > Imagine if this perception would escalate. So, please let's not sell donkeys pretending they are horses, Internet org is not Internet, free basics is not free, we are paying for it. > It is more like > (applause). > It's more like you are basically getting free of your rights, the right to access global and free Internet. > So, we not only need open connectivity. We also really need implementable net neutrality, and in particular the representatives, Brazilian Government representatives that are here, I'd like to ask for them to please consider that there is a urgency to have a regulation of Marco Civil that decree that hopefully would set the tone about that. > Marco Civil was an example in terms of process and content worldwide, but without regulation, it is in danger, mostly by market practices. > Another example of decentralization is related to freedom of expression and privacy. A Special Rapporteur David Kaye said today and I find appealing, why are we reading a newspaper, the newspapers today, the newspapers is also reading us. All this data, data, our digital shadow, our powerful tool, that can be used against us, either by framing us, framing our will, or to be used for pressure or clashing groups of descent. > So while we have never been more connected, we have also never been so exposed as in the digital world, and pervasive surveillance, weak enforcement for data protection or discourse of Cybersecurity and terrorism does not make the perspectives very good. We need strong and enforceable data protection views and here I call attention again to the situation in Brazil, we need to deliver our data protection bill. There was a result of a public consultation to the legislative, they have to approve as soon as possible so we have coherence with national and international agenda in the protection of digital rights or privacy rights. > We also need to understand and ensure that encryption and anonymity can and should be preserved. We need to solve jurisdictional conflicts to ensure that protection of freedom of expression and privacy are not dependent on companies. We need to move forward with transparent and accountable IANA transition towards a global system. > And beyond, policy approaches to human rights, we need to inform these principles for the development of technology. Technology is not neutral. We need to consider that what does it mean to have human rights considerations for standards and protocols. > We need to foster free software as it has been said in sessions here, if we cannot see, we cannot trust it. > We need to work more closely to technical community to understand or at least expose the implications about what they do, and human rights. > Finally, we need more women and more diversity within those who develop technologies. > (applause). > And create policies for technologies. This imbalance is already very expressive in this Opening Session, in which you can count four women. > So to wrap my points, all this list of issues that can be developed further and further, represent the challenges that are increasing, to protect and promote human rights and the core values of the architecture of the Internet in face of decentralization. > My final consideration for us to have in mind is, what is the Internet Governance system that can address all this? What is the role of IGF facing these issues? > IGF is indeed a unique space for multistakeholder dialogue. But we need to fulfill them in data of IGF as provided in the Tunis Agenda. We are currently in the process of reviewing the WSIS+10, where this issue can be addressed. > But the renewal of IGF cannot be used as a maintenance of the status quo, in which the Internet Governance ecosystem remains the same. No one can solve the issues that I have raised so far. The Internet that we were discussing during WSIS process in 2003 and 5, and later on here in Brazil in IGF 2017 is not the same. > The challenges to maintaining a free, open and decentralized network have never been bigger, and the solution is related to access, whether the institutional arrangements that we built are able to protect and promote human rights, and enable us to maintain technical values that inspire the creation of the Internet. > I hope in these days to come, we can discuss this and other issues further, with all the reasons they require but not only discuss really, let us also protest freely. This is also political space. I've been looking and saw some Civil Society representatives are being harassed and taken out of the venue by due to attempt of silent protest around free basics. It is a bit unacceptable in a context in which we are discussing free speech. > So please, let's let people who cannot be on the stage also symbolically express their key questions regarding the future of Internet in front of high level panels like this. > I hope this issue can be solved quickly. > Finally, let us also use this space to think what institutional arrangements are needed to move forward beyond the status quo, in order to reverse the strength of centralization of the Internet. Let us try to put at least many of the beautiful words that were said here and look good in paper, in practice, towards a real people centered, open, free, global and inclusive Internet. > Thank you so much. > (applause). > > > > Congrats! > > -James > > > > > On 11/11/2015, 1:14 a.m., "bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net on behalf of Mishi Choudhary" wrote: > >>Joana, >> >>You rock! >> >>On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: >>> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points >>> raised in it. >>> >>> Radical. >>> j >>> >>> >>> --------------------------------- >>> Jac sm Kee >>> Manager, Women's Rights Programme >>> Association for Progressive Communications >>> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org >>> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe >>> >>> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >>>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >>> >>>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >>>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >>>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! >>> >>>> parminder >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ You >>>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >>>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >>> >> >>-- >>Warm Regards >>Mishi Choudhary, Esq. >>Legal Director >>Software Freedom Law Center >>1995 Broadway Floor 17 >>New York, NY-10023 >>(tel) 212-461-1912 >>(fax) 212-580-0898 >>www.softwarefreedom.org >> >> >>Executive Director >>SFLC.IN >>K-9, Second Floor >>Jangpura Extn. >>New Delhi-110014 >>(tel) +91-11-43587126 >>(fax) +91-11-24323530 >>www.sflc.in >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wisdom.dk at gmail.com Wed Nov 11 14:30:34 2015 From: wisdom.dk at gmail.com (Wisdom Donkor) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 19:30:34 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] INVITATION TO BRASIL IGF 2015 WORKSHOP 226: INTERNET GOVERNANCE AND OPEN DATA Message-ID: We would like to invite you to participate in our workshop session on* INTERNET GOVERNANCE AND OPEN GOVERNMENT DATA* on Thursday November 12th, 2015 from 11:00am - 12:00 (Time Zone: BRT) at Workshop Room 3. ( https://igf2015.sched.org/event/a9da15681c7cc17785289d14ed828a34#.VkORlVI4FR8 ) Prof. Nii Quaynor, the father of internet in Africa, pioneered Internet development and expansion throughout Africa for nearly two decades, establishing some of Africa's first Internet connections and helping set up key organizations, including the African Network Operators Group. He also was the founding chairman of AfriNIC, the African Internet numbers registry, Former ICANN Board Member, IGF Advisory Board Member and Open Government Partnership Member will chair the workshop session. The workshop seeks to explore the relationship between access to the Internet, and the development of web-based Open Data initiatives. As the number of Open data initiatives increases worldwide, including in countries where open governance is not common, the Internet governance issues surrounding such release of data have yet to be thoroughly investigated. The workshop will focus on some of the issues that have arisen with the advent of Open Data, particularly in the African Sub-region. This will be done with a view to helping to bring focus to Internet governance issues, such as access, Infrastructure, the data divide and privacy. We will also examine the need for global ethical standards that can govern the responsible release and use of such data globally within an Internet governance framework. In these present days, Open Data issues are being discussed outside Internet governance domain. We will examine perspectives from multiple Internet governance stakeholders about determination of what data is released and how it is used. This will be done to stimulate discussion about the issues by looking at the number of culturally influenced views on the issue of Internet governance and open data. *Resource person for the session as follows:* Mr. Wisdom Donkor (Moderator) Prof.Nii Quaynor (Chair) Prof. Tao Xiaofeng Ms. Nnenna Nwakanma Mr. Eric Akumaih (Remote panel) Ms. Valentina Pavel Mrs. Florence Toffa Mr. Bonface Witaba Mr. Sonigitu Ekpe *The link for remote participation as follows:* https://intgovforum.webex.com/intgovforum/j.php?RGID=r29bfa4428e6802dc3ae830de85509243 I look forward to seeing you all. WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.) ICANN Fellow / ISOC Member Web/OGPL Portal Specialist National Information Technology Agency (NITA) Ghana Open Data Initiative (GODI) Post Office Box CT. 2439, Cantonments, Accra, Ghana Tel; +233 20 812881 Email: wisdom_dk at hotmail.com wisdom.donkor at data.gov.gh wisdom.dk at gmail.com Skype: wisdom_dk facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk Website: www.nita.gov.gh / www.data.gov.gh www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amalia at mediademocracyfund.org Wed Nov 11 14:47:28 2015 From: amalia at mediademocracyfund.org (amalia deloney) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:47:28 -0500 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net> References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net> Message-ID: It was a great speech. Congrats. -amalia On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:10 AM, James Gannon wrote: > The Raw transcript of the speech is available here and copied below > > > http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2318-2015-11-10-opening-ceremony-main-meeting-room > > > >> MODERATOR: , the next speaker is Joana Varon Ferraz. > >> JOANA VARON FERRAZ: Hello, all protocols have been addressed. I would > like to extend my general greetings for all the participants. And correct > my affiliation. I'm actually researcher and human rights advocate, and > founder director of coding rights which is a female organisation focused in > advancing the enforcement of human rights in the digital world by > integrating usages and understandings of technology into policymaking > process. > I have to say a few weeks ago, we were surprised by a E mail saying that > I've been nominated by my colleagues for this Opening Session. When I got > the news, the first thing that crossed my mind were memories from when I > attended my first IGF back in 2007. Here in Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro. > It was just nine years ago, but as much as I changed, I got some trust > from Civil Society colleagues that nominated me to be here today, the > Internet has also changed a lot. And we have great innovations, more > people connected, indeed, different kind of smart devices, but I'm > concerned. The Internet was built with the core value of connectivity to > be open, interoperable. > But our Internet is becoming more and more centralized. Sometimes, by the > action of governments, but mostly by market powers. That aspect poses > problems to those core values that were originally embedded in the > architecture of the Internet poses problems, protection and promotion of > human rights, and also represents challenges to the Internet Governance > processes. > Particularly concerning, how we address our endless search for the beloved > utopia of a Democratic multistakeholder participation. > Mostly considering this from the mental power imbalances within the > various stakeholder groups, some concerns, human rights and from the mental > technical values for the Internet architecture, like end to end > interoperability, confidentiality and many others are being solved, in this > progressively more centralized Internet, coined by profit and control. > I give some examples of such centralization trends. In terms of > connectivity, for instance, at least in developing countries or emerging > economies, connectivities are still centralized in the hands of very few > telecommunication companies. We need to discuss alternatives to this such > as public regime for Internet services, discuss free spectrum, usage of > cognitive radios. We have technologies for that. And I was glad that > there was a particular plenary addressing this issue in this edition of IGF > already. > Furthermore, we need to understand that Zero Rating practices are not the > solution to the digital divide. There are people, particularly from > developing countries, that practically only access one service and think > it's Internet. > Imagine if this perception would escalate. So, please let's not sell > donkeys pretending they are horses, Internet org is not Internet, free > basics is not free, we are paying for it. > It is more like > (applause). > It's more like you are basically getting free of your rights, the right to > access global and free Internet. > So, we not only need open connectivity. We also really need implementable > net neutrality, and in particular the representatives, Brazilian Government > representatives that are here, I'd like to ask for them to please consider > that there is a urgency to have a regulation of Marco Civil that decree > that hopefully would set the tone about that. > Marco Civil was an example in terms of process and content worldwide, but > without regulation, it is in danger, mostly by market practices. > Another example of decentralization is related to freedom of expression > and privacy. A Special Rapporteur David Kaye said today and I find > appealing, why are we reading a newspaper, the newspapers today, the > newspapers is also reading us. All this data, data, our digital shadow, > our powerful tool, that can be used against us, either by framing us, > framing our will, or to be used for pressure or clashing groups of descent. > So while we have never been more connected, we have also never been so > exposed as in the digital world, and pervasive surveillance, weak > enforcement for data protection or discourse of Cybersecurity and terrorism > does not make the perspectives very good. We need strong and enforceable > data protection views and here I call attention again to the situation in > Brazil, we need to deliver our data protection bill. There was a result of > a public consultation to the legislative, they have to approve as soon as > possible so we have coherence with national and international agenda in the > protection of digital rights or privacy rights. > We also need to understand and ensure that encryption and anonymity can > and should be preserved. We need to solve jurisdictional conflicts to > ensure that protection of freedom of expression and privacy are not > dependent on companies. We need to move forward with transparent and > accountable IANA transition towards a global system. > And beyond, policy approaches to human rights, we need to inform these > principles for the development of technology. Technology is not neutral. > We need to consider that what does it mean to have human rights > considerations for standards and protocols. > We need to foster free software as it has been said in sessions here, if > we cannot see, we cannot trust it. > We need to work more closely to technical community to understand or at > least expose the implications about what they do, and human rights. > Finally, we need more women and more diversity within those who develop > technologies. > (applause). > And create policies for technologies. This imbalance is already very > expressive in this Opening Session, in which you can count four women. > So to wrap my points, all this list of issues that can be developed > further and further, represent the challenges that are increasing, to > protect and promote human rights and the core values of the architecture of > the Internet in face of decentralization. > My final consideration for us to have in mind is, what is the Internet > Governance system that can address all this? What is the role of IGF > facing these issues? > IGF is indeed a unique space for multistakeholder dialogue. But we need > to fulfill them in data of IGF as provided in the Tunis Agenda. We are > currently in the process of reviewing the WSIS+10, where this issue can be > addressed. > But the renewal of IGF cannot be used as a maintenance of the status quo, > in which the Internet Governance ecosystem remains the same. No one can > solve the issues that I have raised so far. The Internet that we were > discussing during WSIS process in 2003 and 5, and later on here in Brazil > in IGF 2017 is not the same. > The challenges to maintaining a free, open and decentralized network have > never been bigger, and the solution is related to access, whether the > institutional arrangements that we built are able to protect and promote > human rights, and enable us to maintain technical values that inspire the > creation of the Internet. > I hope in these days to come, we can discuss this and other issues > further, with all the reasons they require but not only discuss really, let > us also protest freely. This is also political space. I've been looking > and saw some Civil Society representatives are being harassed and taken out > of the venue by due to attempt of silent protest around free basics. It is > a bit unacceptable in a context in which we are discussing free speech. > So please, let's let people who cannot be on the stage also symbolically > express their key questions regarding the future of Internet in front of > high level panels like this. > I hope this issue can be solved quickly. > Finally, let us also use this space to think what institutional > arrangements are needed to move forward beyond the status quo, in order to > reverse the strength of centralization of the Internet. Let us try to put > at least many of the beautiful words that were said here and look good in > paper, in practice, towards a real people centered, open, free, global and > inclusive Internet. > Thank you so much. > (applause). > > > > Congrats! > > -James > > > > > On 11/11/2015, 1:14 a.m., "bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net on behalf > of Mishi Choudhary" mishi at softwarefreedom.org> wrote: > > >Joana, > > > >You rock! > > > >On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: > >> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points > >> raised in it. > >> > >> Radical. > >> j > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------- > >> Jac sm Kee > >> Manager, Women's Rights Programme > >> Association for Progressive Communications > >> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org > >> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe > >> > >> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I > >>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! > >> > >>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion > >>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of > >>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! > >> > >>> parminder > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ You > >>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: > >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your > >>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > >> > > > >-- > >Warm Regards > >Mishi Choudhary, Esq. > >Legal Director > >Software Freedom Law Center > >1995 Broadway Floor 17 > >New York, NY-10023 > >(tel) 212-461-1912 > >(fax) 212-580-0898 > >www.softwarefreedom.org > > > > > >Executive Director > >SFLC.IN > >K-9, Second Floor > >Jangpura Extn. > >New Delhi-110014 > >(tel) +91-11-43587126 > >(fax) +91-11-24323530 > >www.sflc.in > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- amalia deloney, Program Officer Media Democracy Fund m: 612.269.3494 e: amalia at mediademocracyfund.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonathan at gp-digital.org Mon Nov 2 12:30:03 2015 From: jonathan at gp-digital.org (Jonathan Jacobs) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 17:30:03 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] New report on transparency in gov data requests to ICT companies Message-ID: Hi all, Just wanted to flag that an interesting report has just been published by working group 3 of the Freedom Online Coalition. The report investigates transparency processes in government requests to ICT companies for user information and content restriction, analysing analyses how both actors disclose information about law enforcement -- with a particular focus on national security requests. This blog post summarises the key findings. Read the full report here. It should be an interesting read for anyone engaged in transparency and privacy debates. Best, Jonathan ---- *Disclaimer: *The paper is the product of a multi-stakeholder working group, and not an official document of the Freedom Online Coalition. The report does not reflect the official views of FOC member governments (including those represented in the group). *Jonathan Jacobs* Communications and Operations Officer | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT Skype: jonathan.gpdigital Tel: (+44)207 549 0337 gp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andersj at elon.edu Wed Nov 11 16:06:11 2015 From: andersj at elon.edu (Janna Anderson) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 21:06:11 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Important! #IGF2015 Inform the public on issues & values Message-ID: This message is for those who are in Joao Pessoa this week... Greetings! Please take the opportunity to make a difference by sharing your views with the youth on the Imagining the Internet video team. You can seek them out in the conference center, OR IF you would like to make a specific appointment to be interviewed, please write to Michael Bodley - mbodley at elon.edu or Kenn Gaither - tgaither at elon.edu Thank you to the many who have already spoken with us. We have recorded answers to five questions from more than 70 people. The videos are being posted constantly throughout IGF at the following URLs: - Hope for IGF future: http://www.elon.edu/e-web/imagining/event-coverage/global_igf_2015/hope_for_IGF.xhtml - Top Internet issues: http://www.elon.edu/e-web/imagining/event-coverage/global_igf_2015/top_Internet_issues_2015.xhtml - Biggest threats to the 'Net: http://www.elon.edu/e-web/imagining/event-coverage/global_igf_2015/Internet_biggest_threat.xhtml - Access for the last billions: http://www.elon.edu/e-web/imagining/event-coverage/global_igf_2015/Internet_access.xhtml - The future in a nutshell: http://www.elon.edu/e-web/imagining/event-coverage/global_igf_2015/Internet_future_nutshell.xhtml Here's a photo of the team, so you can spot them easily. (Although we confirmed a reservation for an IGF Village space in July they did not give us a space, so, apologies, but we do not have a well-marked home base.) [cid:4B314D81-CCCC-4A24-A9FE-8E838F0E334B] Thank you once again for your generous participation in our work to serve global good by sharing peoples hopes and fears. Best, Janna -- Janna Quitney Anderson Director of Elon University's Imagining the Internet Center http://www.imaginingtheinternet.org Professor of Communications, Senior Faculty Research Fellow, Elon University Senior Contract Researcher, Pew Internet Twitter: @JannaQ https://twitter.com/JANNAQ LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jannaanderson Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/janna.anderson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IGF 2015 Imagining Internet Team Photo sm[1].png Type: image/png Size: 604515 bytes Desc: IGF 2015 Imagining Internet Team Photo sm[1].png URL: From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Nov 11 20:38:30 2015 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:08:30 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] The Internet Social Forum initiative Message-ID: <5643ED96.3020705@itforchange.net> All There will be a brief presentation at the IGF of the Internet Social Forum initiative, and taking of questions and inputs, in an half an hour session on Friday the 13th in workshop room 2 at 2 PM. As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of the World Social Forum, It is planned to be held sometime late 2016. All are invited to come. parminder PS: Enclosed the initial call for an ISF, and the 'Tunis Call for a People's Internet' adopted at a workshop on the ISF initiative at the Worls Social Forum in Tunis is March 2015 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Internet Social Forum - en.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 103459 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Tunis Call.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 51405 bytes Desc: not available URL: From anja at internetdemocracy.in Wed Nov 11 22:49:46 2015 From: anja at internetdemocracy.in (Anja Kovacs) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 09:19:46 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Joana's speech In-Reply-To: References: <56425007.5070001@itforchange.net> <564251D4.2090804@itforchange.net> <56428F22.1090706@apcwomen.org> <5642C0A5.4060709@softwarefreedom.org> <586D87B1-565E-45BD-B040-475F5C5B2FA9@cyberinvasion.net> Message-ID: Fabulously done, Joana. Thanks so much for having put forward all of this, and having done it so very well. Warmly, Anja On 12 November 2015 at 01:17, amalia deloney wrote: > It was a great speech. Congrats. > -amalia > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:10 AM, James Gannon > wrote: > >> The Raw transcript of the speech is available here and copied below >> >> >> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/187-igf-2015/transcripts-igf-2015/2318-2015-11-10-opening-ceremony-main-meeting-room >> >> >> >> MODERATOR: , the next speaker is Joana Varon Ferraz. >> >> JOANA VARON FERRAZ: Hello, all protocols have been addressed. I would >> like to extend my general greetings for all the participants. And correct >> my affiliation. I'm actually researcher and human rights advocate, and >> founder director of coding rights which is a female organisation focused in >> advancing the enforcement of human rights in the digital world by >> integrating usages and understandings of technology into policymaking >> process. >> I have to say a few weeks ago, we were surprised by a E mail saying that >> I've been nominated by my colleagues for this Opening Session. When I got >> the news, the first thing that crossed my mind were memories from when I >> attended my first IGF back in 2007. Here in Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro. >> It was just nine years ago, but as much as I changed, I got some trust >> from Civil Society colleagues that nominated me to be here today, the >> Internet has also changed a lot. And we have great innovations, more >> people connected, indeed, different kind of smart devices, but I'm >> concerned. The Internet was built with the core value of connectivity to >> be open, interoperable. >> But our Internet is becoming more and more centralized. Sometimes, by >> the action of governments, but mostly by market powers. That aspect poses >> problems to those core values that were originally embedded in the >> architecture of the Internet poses problems, protection and promotion of >> human rights, and also represents challenges to the Internet Governance >> processes. >> Particularly concerning, how we address our endless search for the >> beloved utopia of a Democratic multistakeholder participation. >> Mostly considering this from the mental power imbalances within the >> various stakeholder groups, some concerns, human rights and from the mental >> technical values for the Internet architecture, like end to end >> interoperability, confidentiality and many others are being solved, in this >> progressively more centralized Internet, coined by profit and control. >> I give some examples of such centralization trends. In terms of >> connectivity, for instance, at least in developing countries or emerging >> economies, connectivities are still centralized in the hands of very few >> telecommunication companies. We need to discuss alternatives to this such >> as public regime for Internet services, discuss free spectrum, usage of >> cognitive radios. We have technologies for that. And I was glad that >> there was a particular plenary addressing this issue in this edition of IGF >> already. >> Furthermore, we need to understand that Zero Rating practices are not the >> solution to the digital divide. There are people, particularly from >> developing countries, that practically only access one service and think >> it's Internet. >> Imagine if this perception would escalate. So, please let's not sell >> donkeys pretending they are horses, Internet org is not Internet, free >> basics is not free, we are paying for it. >> It is more like >> (applause). >> It's more like you are basically getting free of your rights, the right >> to access global and free Internet. >> So, we not only need open connectivity. We also really need >> implementable net neutrality, and in particular the representatives, >> Brazilian Government representatives that are here, I'd like to ask for >> them to please consider that there is a urgency to have a regulation of >> Marco Civil that decree that hopefully would set the tone about that. >> Marco Civil was an example in terms of process and content worldwide, but >> without regulation, it is in danger, mostly by market practices. >> Another example of decentralization is related to freedom of expression >> and privacy. A Special Rapporteur David Kaye said today and I find >> appealing, why are we reading a newspaper, the newspapers today, the >> newspapers is also reading us. All this data, data, our digital shadow, >> our powerful tool, that can be used against us, either by framing us, >> framing our will, or to be used for pressure or clashing groups of descent. >> So while we have never been more connected, we have also never been so >> exposed as in the digital world, and pervasive surveillance, weak >> enforcement for data protection or discourse of Cybersecurity and terrorism >> does not make the perspectives very good. We need strong and enforceable >> data protection views and here I call attention again to the situation in >> Brazil, we need to deliver our data protection bill. There was a result of >> a public consultation to the legislative, they have to approve as soon as >> possible so we have coherence with national and international agenda in the >> protection of digital rights or privacy rights. >> We also need to understand and ensure that encryption and anonymity can >> and should be preserved. We need to solve jurisdictional conflicts to >> ensure that protection of freedom of expression and privacy are not >> dependent on companies. We need to move forward with transparent and >> accountable IANA transition towards a global system. >> And beyond, policy approaches to human rights, we need to inform these >> principles for the development of technology. Technology is not neutral. >> We need to consider that what does it mean to have human rights >> considerations for standards and protocols. >> We need to foster free software as it has been said in sessions here, if >> we cannot see, we cannot trust it. >> We need to work more closely to technical community to understand or at >> least expose the implications about what they do, and human rights. >> Finally, we need more women and more diversity within those who develop >> technologies. >> (applause). >> And create policies for technologies. This imbalance is already very >> expressive in this Opening Session, in which you can count four women. >> So to wrap my points, all this list of issues that can be developed >> further and further, represent the challenges that are increasing, to >> protect and promote human rights and the core values of the architecture of >> the Internet in face of decentralization. >> My final consideration for us to have in mind is, what is the Internet >> Governance system that can address all this? What is the role of IGF >> facing these issues? >> IGF is indeed a unique space for multistakeholder dialogue. But we need >> to fulfill them in data of IGF as provided in the Tunis Agenda. We are >> currently in the process of reviewing the WSIS+10, where this issue can be >> addressed. >> But the renewal of IGF cannot be used as a maintenance of the status quo, >> in which the Internet Governance ecosystem remains the same. No one can >> solve the issues that I have raised so far. The Internet that we were >> discussing during WSIS process in 2003 and 5, and later on here in Brazil >> in IGF 2017 is not the same. >> The challenges to maintaining a free, open and decentralized network have >> never been bigger, and the solution is related to access, whether the >> institutional arrangements that we built are able to protect and promote >> human rights, and enable us to maintain technical values that inspire the >> creation of the Internet. >> I hope in these days to come, we can discuss this and other issues >> further, with all the reasons they require but not only discuss really, let >> us also protest freely. This is also political space. I've been looking >> and saw some Civil Society representatives are being harassed and taken out >> of the venue by due to attempt of silent protest around free basics. It is >> a bit unacceptable in a context in which we are discussing free speech. >> So please, let's let people who cannot be on the stage also symbolically >> express their key questions regarding the future of Internet in front of >> high level panels like this. >> I hope this issue can be solved quickly. >> Finally, let us also use this space to think what institutional >> arrangements are needed to move forward beyond the status quo, in order to >> reverse the strength of centralization of the Internet. Let us try to put >> at least many of the beautiful words that were said here and look good in >> paper, in practice, towards a real people centered, open, free, global and >> inclusive Internet. >> Thank you so much. >> (applause). >> >> >> >> Congrats! >> >> -James >> >> >> >> >> On 11/11/2015, 1:14 a.m., "bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net on behalf >> of Mishi Choudhary" > mishi at softwarefreedom.org> wrote: >> >> >Joana, >> > >> >You rock! >> > >> >On 11/10/2015 07:43 PM, Jac sm Kee wrote: >> >> Really was a very substantive speech. Thank you for all of the points >> >> raised in it. >> >> >> >> Radical. >> >> j >> >> >> >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> >> Jac sm Kee >> >> Manager, Women's Rights Programme >> >> Association for Progressive Communications >> >> www.apc.org | www.takebackthetech.net | erotics.apc.org >> >> Jitsi: jacsmk | Skype: jacsmk | Twitter: @jhybe >> >> >> >> On 11/11/2015 04:21, parminder wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> Congrats Joana, it was the most substantial and evocative speech I >> >>> have heard at the IGF in a long time (if ever)! >> >> >> >>> It was both precisely to the point, and carried the right emotion >> >>> and evocation. And so brave of you to have raised the issue of >> >>> removal of the CS protesters... Bravo!! >> >> >> >>> parminder >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> ____________________________________________________________ You >> >>> received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> >>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. To unsubscribe or change your >> >>> settings, visit: http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> >> >> > >> >-- >> >Warm Regards >> >Mishi Choudhary, Esq. >> >Legal Director >> >Software Freedom Law Center >> >1995 Broadway Floor 17 >> >New York, NY-10023 >> >(tel) 212-461-1912 >> >(fax) 212-580-0898 >> >www.softwarefreedom.org >> > >> > >> >Executive Director >> >SFLC.IN >> >K-9, Second Floor >> >Jangpura Extn. >> >New Delhi-110014 >> >(tel) +91-11-43587126 >> >(fax) +91-11-24323530 >> >www.sflc.in >> > >> > >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > > > -- > amalia deloney, Program Officer > Media Democracy Fund > m: 612.269.3494 > e: amalia at mediademocracyfund.org > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -- Dr. Anja Kovacs The Internet Democracy Project +91 9899028053 | @anjakovacs www.internetdemocracy.in -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kichango at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 02:38:02 2015 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:38:02 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> References: <5643639F.2020006@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: N.B. I have read the posts that came after this one re opening up the rules to a multistakeholder process. But since they weren't posted to IGC list I'm replying at this level in the thread. Sorry for any confusion or inconvenience. -- The argument in favor of banishing all forms of unscripted collective expression at a UN event is a bit strange, though. That the ability (right?) to protest must be subject to an organization's procedural rules defined by bureaucrats? To the best of my knowledge, the right for people to protest has never been gladly granted by any authority before they demanded it. And I thought protests in free societies were only expected to stand the test of legality, which is defined by national law (the fact that the venue of a UN event is considered a UN territory notwithstanding.) Even people protest illegally when the laws are unjust or illegitimate. In any case, it's obvious this rule needs some multistakeholder scrutiny for the good of the right to free and peaceful expression, including protests. Mawaki On Nov 11, 2015 3:50 PM, "Carlos Afonso" wrote: > I do hope they do not. This caused a huge problem for all of us (civil > society here at the IGF). We had (event organizers, the BR gov, CGI.br) > a very hard time to have the UN revert the decision to reinstate the > credentials and not to suspend others. > > Now the UN is checking bags for "harmful or suspicious" content. > > There are several forms of advocacy and manifestation, and some may do > more harm than good. Unfortunately this was one case. > > Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs > section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules because > they were not published. > > fraternal regards > > --c.a. > > On 11-11-15 12:32, Felipe Sanches wrote: > > Now I hope they raise their banners again :-) > > > > "Paz sem voz é medo" (Peace without voice is fear) > > > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro > > > wrote: > > > > Update on Brazilian activists banned from #IGF2015 Their badge has > > been returned! UN has reconsidered the issue, thanks to all who > > contributed w/ the negotiation > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net >. > > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > > > > -- > Carlos A. Afonso > Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br > CGI.br - http://cgi.br > > GPG 0x9EE8F8E3 > Fingerprint EB2C 8F4B 1C68 8BB7 B6EC 9413 1FE5 1BB0 9EE8 F8E3 > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Kivuva at transworldafrica.com Thu Nov 12 05:11:15 2015 From: Kivuva at transworldafrica.com (Mwendwa Kivuva) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 13:11:15 +0300 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] update on Brazilian activists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Mawaki. That is my point of view too. Yesterday I heard a very interesting quote "we knew we were doing the wrong thing, but nobody asked us to stop". Regards Mwendwa Kivuva On Nov 12, 2015 5:15 AM, "ymshana2003" wrote: > +1 > Nawaki Chango.. > > > Sent from Samsung Mobile > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Mawaki Chango > Date:12/11/2015 09:38 (GMT+02:00) > To: "Carlos A. Afonso" > Cc: Felipe Sanches ,Internet Governance ,Renata Aquino Ribeiro ,BestBits > list > Subject: Re: [governance] [bestbits] update on Brazilian activists > > N.B. I have read the posts that came after this one re opening up the > rules to a multistakeholder process. But since they weren't posted to IGC > list I'm replying at this level in the thread. Sorry for any confusion or > inconvenience. > -- > > The argument in favor of banishing all forms of unscripted collective > expression at a UN event is a bit strange, though. That the ability > (right?) to protest must be subject to an organization's procedural rules > defined by bureaucrats? > > To the best of my knowledge, the right for people to protest has never > been gladly granted by any authority before they demanded it. And I thought > protests in free societies were only expected to stand the test of > legality, which is defined by national law (the fact that the venue of a UN > event is considered a UN territory notwithstanding.) Even people protest > illegally when the laws are unjust or illegitimate. > > In any case, it's obvious this rule needs some multistakeholder scrutiny > for the good of the right to free and peaceful expression, including > protests. > > Mawaki > On Nov 11, 2015 3:50 PM, "Carlos Afonso" wrote: > >> I do hope they do not. This caused a huge problem for all of us (civil >> society here at the IGF). We had (event organizers, the BR gov, CGI.br) >> a very hard time to have the UN revert the decision to reinstate the >> credentials and not to suspend others. >> >> Now the UN is checking bags for "harmful or suspicious" content. >> >> There are several forms of advocacy and manifestation, and some may do >> more harm than good. Unfortunately this was one case. >> >> Strangely enough, the rules are published in the IGF page (FAQs >> section), and some CS people argued they did not know the rules because >> they were not published. >> >> fraternal regards >> >> --c.a. >> >> On 11-11-15 12:32, Felipe Sanches wrote: >> > Now I hope they raise their banners again :-) >> > >> > "Paz sem voz é medo" (Peace without voice is fear) >> > >> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro >> > > wrote: >> > >> > Update on Brazilian activists banned from #IGF2015 Their badge has >> > been returned! UN has reconsidered the issue, thanks to all who >> > contributed w/ the negotiation >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>. >> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > >> >> -- >> Carlos A. Afonso >> Instituto Nupef - https://nupef.org.br >> CGI.br - http://cgi.br >> >> GPG 0x9EE8F8E3 >> Fingerprint EB2C 8F4B 1C68 8BB7 B6EC 9413 1FE5 1BB0 9EE8 F8E3 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list: >> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. >> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: >> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > To be removed from the list, visit: > http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing > > For all other list information and functions, see: > http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance > To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: > http://www.igcaucus.org/ > > Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sarvjeet.singh at nludelhi.ac.in Thu Nov 12 05:25:02 2015 From: sarvjeet.singh at nludelhi.ac.in (Sarvjeet Singh) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:25:02 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] (TODAY 9 AM) IGF Roundtable on Hate & Dangerous Speech Online (Room 10) Message-ID: *A Roundtable on* *Hate & Dangerous Speech Online: Identification & Strategies* 9:00 am – 10.30 am, TODAY (12th November 2015) *at* *Workshop Room - 10* *organised by* *The Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University* *The Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University, Delhi* *The Dangerous Speech Project* *The Digital Asia Hub* *Digital Rights Foundation, Pakistan* *&* *Dr. Cherian George* *Moderator: Professor Urs Gasser**, Executive Director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University* *Schedule* *Timings* *Programme* 9:00 am - 9:10 am *Introductory Remarks* 9:10 am - 10:20 am *Hate Speech in South Asia * Brief outline of online hate speech in countries in the region, including India, Pakistan, Singapore, South Korea and Sri Lanka *Hate Speech Online * Frank La Rue, Judith Lichtenberg and Ankhi Das will discuss the normative challenges *Discussing Strategies to Deal with Online Hate Speech* 10:20 am - 10:30 am *Concluding Remarks* -- Sarvjeet Singh | Senior Fellow & Project Manager Centre for Communication Governance | National Law University, Delhi | Sector-14, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110078 | Cell: (+91) 999-023-2298 | Fax: (+91) 11-280-34256 | www.ccgdelhi.org . www.ccgtlr.org . www.nludelhi.ac.in | Twitter: @ccgdelhi . @sarvjeetmoond -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From isolatedn at gmail.com Thu Nov 12 08:49:51 2015 From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 19:19:51 +0530 Subject: [bestbits] Happening Now at Workshop Room 3: 6th meeting of the Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet Values In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello The session is archived at the URL http://livestream.com/internetsociety2/igf Please share your views on the thoughts expressed at this workshop. Thank you Sivasubramanian M Sivasubramanian M On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Sivasubramanian M wrote: > Hello > > Please join us at the meeting. > > Thank you > > Sivasubramanian M > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:45 AM, Sivasubramanian M > wrote: > >> Hello All, >> >> Please join the 6th meeting of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Core Internet >> Values at Workshop Room 3 on 11th November, 14 00 - 15 30 hours. This >> dynamic coalition on Core Internet Values was formed following the >> "Workshop on Fundamentals: Core Internet Values" held during the 2009 IGF >> at Egypt, chaired by the Internet Society Past President Lynn St.Amour. The >> Coalition has met during the five IGFs that followed Egypt and its sixth >> meeting is at Brazil, to be chaired by Olivier Crepin Le-Blond. >> >> The pursuit of the Coalition in general is to work towards causing the >> Internet to evolve in such a manner that its Core Values are not >> compromised. The stakeholders to Internet Governance might share the view >> that the Internet remains Global as One Internet, Open, Free, end to end so >> as to foster Global Access, Permission-less Innovation and Global >> Prosperity. >> >> The sub-theme of the 6th meeting in particular is : "Core Internet Values >> as a Reference Standard for Global Internet Policy". >> >> This would be to discuss the thought that the organizations responsible >> for components of Internet Governance including large Internet >> Organizations, Governments and Civil Society organizations could >> formulate/contribute to formulate Internet policy in a manner that the >> Internet does not slip away from Core Internet Values. >> >> Panellists: >> >> Kathryn Brown, President and CEO of the Internet Society >> Paul Wilson, Director General of APNIC >> Erica Mann, Member, Board of Directors, ICANN >> Carlton Anthony Samuels, former Member of the At-Large Advisory Committee >> Mark Carvell, Representative of the United Kingdom at the Governmental >> Advisory Committee of ICANN >> Olivier Crepin Le-Blond, Past Chair of the ICANN At-Large Advisory >> Committee >> >> If you are in Brazil for the IGF, please join the discussions at Workshop >> Room 3 on 11th November during 14 00 hours - 15 30 hours. >> >> Thank you >> Sivasubramanian M >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sarvjeet.singh at nludelhi.ac.in Thu Nov 12 09:40:37 2015 From: sarvjeet.singh at nludelhi.ac.in (Sarvjeet Singh) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:40:37 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] (TODAY 2 PM) IGF Roundtable on Equity and the Developing World in Internet Governance (Room 10) Message-ID: *A Roundtable on* *Equity & the Developing World in Internet Governance* 2:00 pm – 3.30 pm, TODAY (12th November 2015) *at* *Workshop Room - 10* *organised by* *The Centre for Communication Governance at National Law University, Delhi* *&* *The Digital Asia Hub* *Moderator: Professor Ang Peng Hwa**, **Member - Steering Committee, Digital Asia Hub and President - elect, International Communication Association* -- Sarvjeet Singh | Senior Fellow & Project Manager Centre for Communication Governance | National Law University, Delhi | Sector-14, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110078 | Cell: (+91) 999-023-2298 | Fax: (+91) 11-280-34256 | www.ccgdelhi.org . www.ccgtlr.org . www.nludelhi.ac.in | Twitter: @ccgdelhi . @sarvjeetmoond -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sheetal at gp-digital.org Thu Nov 12 09:56:00 2015 From: sheetal at gp-digital.org (Sheetal Kumar) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 11:56:00 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] The African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedoms initiative policy brief Message-ID: Hi all, This is to share a just-published policy brief on the African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedoms initiative. Authored by Global Partners Digital Associate Tom Orrell, the brief provides an overview of the* African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedom*, its history, regional context, and role in the development of rights-based Internet policy regimes in the region. As a tool for human rights defenders, it also offers practical takeaways and lessons which should be of interest and use to anyone working in human rights online advocacy. You can find it here: http://bit.ly/1QuGiHE And please share the brief with anyone who you think might be interested. Best, -- *Sheetal Kumar* Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7739569514 <%2B44%20%280%297852%20535222> | -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bkilic at citizen.org Thu Nov 12 12:51:10 2015 From: bkilic at citizen.org (Burcu Kilic) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 17:51:10 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] How Trade Agreements Shape the Future of Internet Governance? Message-ID: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC998B@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> Please join us. How Trade Agreements Shape the Future of Internet Governance? 4:00 pm - 5.30 pm, Room - 5 http://igf2015.intgovforum.org/event/af6ef9a744c6fd781f51d007ff2adbc6#.VkTKBberTIU Moderator: Carolina Rossini, Public Knowledge Speakers Burcu Kilic, Public Citizen Claudio Ruiz, Derechos Digitales Julia Reda, Member of the European Parliament Laura DeNardis, American University Manu Bhardwaj, U.S. Department of State Marcel Leonardi, Google Usman Ahmed, PayPal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Marta.WIELOCH at coe.int Tue Nov 3 07:33:05 2015 From: Marta.WIELOCH at coe.int (WIELOCH Marta) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2015 12:33:05 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] Council of Europe Open Forum at the IGF 12 Nov Message-ID: An enabling environment for Internet freedom Open Forum Organised by the Council of Europe 12 November 2015 – 12:00-13:00 Workshop Room 2 The Council of Europe will present and discuss its work on Ø Internet Freedom Ø Mass Surveillance Ø Safety of Journalists Speakers o Mr Dirk Van Eeckhout – Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Permanent Representation of Belgium to the Council of Europe o Mr Matjaž Gruden - ‎Director of the Policy Planning Directorate, Council of Europe o Mr Günter Schirmer – Secretariat of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights o Mr Max Schrems, EUROPE.V.FACEBOOK.ORG o Ms Lidia Brito, UNESCO Director for Montevideo Office o Ms Karmen Turk, Member of Council of Europe’s Committee of Experts on cross-border flow of Internet traffic & Internet freedom o Mr Marco Pancini, Google Senior Policy Counsel Contact: elvana.thaci at coe.int Council of Europe video series [cid:image001.jpg at 01D11188.71D00E20] [cid:image002.jpg at 01D11188.71D00E20] [cid:image003.jpg at 01D11188.71D00E20] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 10985 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14523 bytes Desc: image002.jpg URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 14176 bytes Desc: image003.jpg URL: From anriette at apc.org Thu Nov 12 13:15:42 2015 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 20:15:42 +0200 Subject: [bestbits] Pamphlets lost at Best Bits meeting In-Reply-To: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC998B@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> References: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC998B@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> Message-ID: <5644D74E.3060800@apc.org> Dear all At the Best Bits meeting on Sunday a brown paper package containing leaflets about the Working Group on IG Book edited by Bill Drake on the Working Group on IG (WGIG). APC is one of the publishers. They are dark blue on one side and have a blurb about the book on the other side. Can someone who stays at the Xenius please ask if they found these? We think they were lost in the lunch room during lunch. Thanks a lot! If found please let me know. Anriette From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Fri Nov 13 07:58:33 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 09:58:33 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] Microsoft unveils German data plan to tackle US internet spying Message-ID: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/540a296e-87ff-11e5-9f8c-a8d619fa707c.html#axzz3r4thbhrI November 11, 2015 8:46 am Microsoft unveils German data plan to tackle US internet spying Murad Ahmed in Berlin and Richard Waters in San Francisco - Share - Author alerts - Print - Clip - Gift Article - Comments [image: Satya Nadella speaks during a keynote address at the DreamForce Conference in San Francisco, California, US]©Bloomberg Microsoft will allow foreign customers to hold data in new European facilities designed to shield customers from US government surveillance, in one of the most drastic corporate responses yet to the American internet spying scandal . On Wednesday, the US software company said it was setting up new data centres in Germany that will be under the control of Deutsche Telekom , the German telecommunications group. The legal and technical arrangement is intended to put the data of European government and business customers, along with millions of citizens, out of reach from US authorities. - - - - More ON THIS TOPIC - Microsoft’s plan for German data centres - Twitter told to store Russian data in Russia - UK overhauls state internet surveillance - FT View One power too many for the security state IN TECHNOLOGY - Sophos expects growth as cyber fears rise - Grabtaxi steps up Uber rivalry in SE Asia - Dialog Semiconductor hits back at Elliott - China’s Singles Day sets spending record Sign up now [image: firstFT] *First*FT is our new essential daily email briefing of the best stories from across the web Technology analysts say it is a “watershed moment”, describing the manoeuvre as the first time a major US tech group had accepted its inability to protect customer data from US governmental over-reach . Microsoft’s initiative could have a ripple effect across the industry, creating a tough new privacy standard that customers may soon also demand from other “cloud computing” providers such as Google , Amazon and Oracle . Silicon Valley groups are struggling to regain the trust of European customers in the wake of disclosures by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden about widespread internet surveillance by US intelligence agencies. Mr Nadella told the Financial Times that the effort was designed to regain the trust of customers which had been lost as a result of the Snowden disclosures. “We need to earn both trust of our global customers and operate globally. That’s at the cornerstone of how we’ve done business and how we will continue to do business,” he said. In response, US tech groups have moved to build data centres in European countries. But many of the region’s customers remain unsatisfied that these efforts alone can protect against snooping. “I think Microsoft have come to the conclusion that they can’t get away from being a US company,” says Carsten Casper, analyst at Gartner, the research group. “I find that more honourable than others who try to move their data centres to Europe to appease customers, but how good is it to have data centres in those countries if you can access it from abroad with no particular problem?” Analysts say Microsoft’s concession could complicate negotiations between US and EU politicians on a new transatlantic data sharing pact known as “Safe Harbour”. Talks have been faltering for months over the thorny political issue of surveillance. I think Microsoft have come to the conclusion that they can’t get away from being a US company - Carsten Casper, Gartner analyst *Tweet* this quote Under Microsoft’s German arrangement, T-Systems, a Deutsche Telekom subsidiary, will operate two new data centre facilities in the country that will open for business in late 2016. They will be used solely to house information on Microsoft European customers, who will also be asked to pay more to store data in this way. But T-Systems will act as a “trustee” of the facilities, with Microsoft insisting its employees will have no access to the data held at the facilities without the German company’s permission. The companies believe this arrangement means Microsoft will not have to respond to governmental demands for information held in these data centres, forcing official requests to go through German authorities instead. Germany’s data protection laws, enforced by powerful privacy watchdogs, are considered to be among the continent’s strictest. The trustee solution is also a response to Microsoft’s legal battle against an order from a New York court, which is trying to force the software group to hand US authorities emails from a US citizen stored on a Microsoft server in Ireland. Opinion *Worldwide fight over personal data has barely begun * [image: White collar criminal in blue suit is hacking holes into the security helix of a virtual firewall. His left hand is removing unlocked data packets with a swiping movement. Concept for cyber attack.] One can’t blame Americans for complaining about European hypocrisy, writes Evgeny Morozov Read more Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president and chief legal officer, has made the case a centrepiece of the company’s pushback against intrusive government demands for personal information, pledging to take the case to the US Supreme Court if necessary. Executives at rival technology companies are concerned about the implications of the high-profile case because of the precedent it will set in the running of their businesses. Microsoft’s German plan would address this issue, should it lose the case. But Paul Miller from Forrester Research says the trustee model is also likely to come under legal attack in the US. “As with all new legal approaches, we don’t know it is watertight until it is challenged in court,” he says. “Microsoft and T-Systems’ lawyers are very good and say its watertight. But we can be sure opposition lawyers will look for all the holes.” Last month, Europe gave a stinging rebuke to the transatlantic digital alliance, scrapping a 15-year pact that allowed US tech companies to ship personal information about European citizens wholesale to the US. The European Court of Justice decision to invalidate the “Safe Harbour” agreement has left thousands of businesses scrambling to change their legal footing to avoid breaking the law. Europe’s data protection authorities have given companies until January to find alternative data transfer agreements. The US and EU are working to secure a new Safe Harbour treaty but analysts say Microsoft’s decision may strengthen the resolve of EU diplomats who are holding out for stronger assurances over whether citizens data will be subsumed into the US surveillance regime. “I think it will put pressure on negotiators trying to reach a new transatlantic privacy agreement,” says Mr Casper. “There’s a new piece in the puzzle now.” -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From carolina.rossini at gmail.com Fri Nov 13 08:29:24 2015 From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 10:29:24 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] Public Knowledge Welcomes New Members and Chair to Board of Directors Message-ID: fyi :-) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Public Knowledge Date: Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 2:19 PM Subject: Public Knowledge Welcomes New Members and Chair to Board of Directors To: Carolina Rossini [image: Public Knowledge] Carolina -- This year, Public Knowledge welcomed four new members to its *Board of Directors * ! [image: newboardweb.jpg] Pictured from left to right: - *Moses Boyd* is a Founding Partner of the Integrated Solutions Group ; - *Virginia Lam Abrams* is the Senior Vice President of Communications and Government Relations at Project Decibel and Founder of Berkeley Place Strategies ; - *Frank Torres* is the Director of Consumer Affairs and a Senior Policy Counsel for the Microsoft Corporation ; - and *Laurent Crenshaw * is the head of Federal Public Policy for Yelp . [image: MauraEmail.jpg] We also welcomed *Maura Colleton Corbett* as our new Board Chair. Maura has been an active member of the Public Knowledge Board of Directors since 2009, and is the CEO and Founder of the Glen Echo Group . We are thrilled to welcome these talented individuals to preserve the strong governance and thought leadership that guides our advocacy in intellectual property, telecommunications, and Internet policy . *Read our press statement on our newest members here , and learn about all 12 members of our Board of Directors here .* Public Knowledge http://publicknowledge.nationbuilder.com/ Public Knowledge · 1818 N St NW, Suite 410, Washington, DC 20036, United States This email was sent to crossini at publicknowledge.org. To stop receiving emails, click here . You can also keep up with Public Knowledge on Twitter or Facebook . Created with NationBuilder , the essential toolkit for leaders. -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy and Strategy * *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -- *Carolina Rossini * *Vice President, International Policy* *Public Knowledge* *http://www.publicknowledge.org/ * + 1 6176979389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bkilic at citizen.org Fri Nov 13 08:39:04 2015 From: bkilic at citizen.org (Burcu Kilic) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 13:39:04 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] TPP: Vietnam, Malaysia Temporarily Shielded From Some E-Commerce Disputes Message-ID: <3620AA8DD8446B49BBB11ACA23A413BB1DCC9F73@DAGN16b-e6.exg6.exghost.com> Vietnam, Malaysia Temporarily Shielded From Some E-Commerce Disputes Posted: November 11, 2015 Inside US Trade Updated: Vietnam and Malaysia have secured time-limited moratoriums preventing other Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) countries from initiating a dispute settlement case even if the two Southeast Asian nations fail to uphold key provisions of the agreement's chapter on electronic commerce, including the obligation not to restrict data flows. The moratoriums, contained in Article 14.18 of the Electronic Commerce chapter of TPP, provide both Malaysia and Vietnam with a free pass from dispute settlement for two years after the date of entry into force of TPP with regard to requirements for parties not to discriminate against "digital products" and to allow the free movement of data across their borders. Those obligations are established in Articles 14.4 and 14.11, respectively. Separately, Vietnam also secured a two-year escape from dispute settlement with regard to Article 14.13 of the e-commerce chapter, which prohibits governments from requiring network servers to be located within their territory -- a type of measure referred to by industry critics as a "localization" barrier to trade. All of these moratoriums apply only to the "existing measures" of Vietnam and Malaysia, meaning any more restrictive measures they put in place could be challenged under TPP dispute settlement during the two-year period. Some congressional Democrats view the moratoriums as a "pretty decent outcome," since Malaysia and Vietnam will still have to abide by the specified obligations from day one, the length of the moratoriums is not particularly long, and the language limits the moratoriums to existing measures, according to a House Ways & Means Committee staffer. The two-year moratorium is shorter than Vietnam had originally sought. It had previously pushed for a five-year window during which it would be able to shelter itself from state-to-state disputes brought under certain provisions of the e-commerce chapter. U.S. lawmakers and business groups, in response, pushed U.S. trade negotiators to resist such exemptions. TPP parties also appear to have left space for some restrictions on data flows in the e-commerce chapter. In the negotiations, Singapore had sought assurances that it could block content for "moral" reasons, while Australia wanted to ensure its law requiring personal health data to be stored domestically would not violate the rules. Paragraph two of Article 14.11 establishes the general rule that data flows should not be restricted. It states that TPP parties "shall allow the cross-border transfer of information by electronic means, including personal information, when this activity is for the conduct of the business of a covered person." But there is an exception to this broad obligation. Paragraph three of Article 14.11 reads: "Nothing in this Article shall prevent a Party from adopting or maintaining measures inconsistent with paragraph 2 to achieve a legitimate public policy objective, provided that the measure: (a) is not applied in a manner which would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade; and (b) does not impose restrictions on transfers of information greater than are required to achieve the objective." In addition, the scope of the entities for whom the cross-border data flow obligation applies is limited in the definition of a "covered person" in the text. A covered person is defined as an investor or covered investment under the Investment chapter, or a service supplier under the Cross-Border Trade in Services chapter, but it does not include a "financial institution" or a "cross-border financial service supplier of a Party." A footnote to the text states that for Australia, a covered person also does not include a credit reporting body. The prohibition on localization of servers in Article 14.3 also excludes the financial services sector, by way of this definition. The financial services chapter of TPP includes an obligation for countries to allow transfers of financial data, but does not have any provisions on server localization -- meaning the sector effectively has fewer rights under TPP, something that industry representatives have lashed out at. Paragraph two of Article 14.3 reads: "No Party shall require a covered person to use or locate computing facilities in that Party's territory as a condition for conducting business in that territory." But paragraph three of this article contains the same exception language as is found in the article on data flows. The other article for which both Malaysia and Vietnam secured a moratorium on dispute settlement is Article 14.4, which stipulates that no party shall accord "less favourable treatment to digital products created, produced, published, contracted for commissioned or first made available on commercial terms in the territory of another Party, or to digital products of which the author, performer, producer, developer or owner is a person of another Party, that it accords to other like digital products." Both the data flow and server localization provisions in TPP are new developments in U.S. trade policy. The U.S.-Korea free trade agreement gave a nod to the significance of cross-border data flows -- saying that parties "shall endeavor to refrain from imposing or maintaining unnecessary barriers to electronic information flows across borders" -- although it is non-binding. TPP's e-commerce chapter also differs from its predecessors -- the e-commerce chapters found in the U.S.-Korea FTA and the U.S.-Australia FTA -- in other important ways. Another significant departure from those bilateral agreements can be found in Article 14.8, paragraph two, which requires that each TPP member adopt or maintain a legal framework to protect personal information of users of electronic commerce. Neither KORUS nor the Australia FTA has such a provision. Article 14.8 paragraph two reads, "each Party shall adopt or maintain a legal framework that provides for the protection of the personal information of the users of electronic commerce. In the development of its legal framework... each Party should take into account principles and guidelines of relevant international parties." In a footnote to the text, both Brunei and Vietnam are essentially given a blanket exemption from this requirement, until they actually put such a framework in place -- after which they must simply maintain it. A separate footnote states that a party may comply with this obligation "by adopting or maintaining measures such as a comprehensive privacy, personal information or personal data protection laws, sector-specific laws covering privacy, or laws that provide for the enforcement of voluntary undertakings by enterprises relating to privacy." The U.S. does not have a comprehensive data privacy law on the books -- a fact that was central to the European Union's determination that the U.S fails to provide "adequate" protection for personal data. But it does have area-specific privacy laws and the ability to enforce voluntary arrangements through the Federal Trade Commission. The TPP also includes rules on "unsolicited commercial electronic messages," or spam. Article 14.14 of TPP's e-commerce chapter requires parties to "adopt or maintain measures" which requires supplies of such messages to allow recipients to prevent future reception of those messages, require the consent of recipients to receive such messages, or otherwise minimize the amount of unsolicited commercial electronic messages recipients receive. The TPP e-commerce chapter contains obligations relating to the treatment of source code not found in either of the bilaterals. Article 14.17 stipulates that parties cannot require the transfer of, or access to software source code as a condition of import, sale, distribution or use. There is an exception for instances in which the software is used for "critical infrastructure" or release of the source code is required by patent applications, granted patents or is required by a judicial authority in relation to patent disputes. TPP also includes a number of non-binding provisions on cooperation, saying the parties "shall endeavour to" work to assist small and medium enterprises in the use of e-commerce, and exchange information on personal information protection, security in electronic communications, consumer access to products and services offered online, and other topics. The next Article in TPP's e-commerce chapter, 14.16, focuses on cybersecurity cooperation, an issue not mentioned in KORUS nor the Australia-U.S. FTA. 14.16 reads "parties recognise the importance of: (a) building the capabilities of their national entities responsible for computer security incident response; and (b) using existing collaboration mechanisms to cooperate to identify and mitigate malicious intrusions or dissemination of malicious code that affect the electronic networks of the Parties." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From willi.uebelherr at riseup.net Fri Nov 13 09:41:51 2015 From: willi.uebelherr at riseup.net (willi uebelherr) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 10:11:51 -0430 Subject: [bestbits] The Internet Social Forum initiative In-Reply-To: <5643ED96.3020705@itforchange.net> References: <5643ED96.3020705@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5645F6AF.8080304@riseup.net> (please: I use the lists for IUF and IGF, if i am member in this list. If you answer, please check your membership) Dear friends. 1) I do not understand, why parminder append the texts and do not write the link. He do not understand the principles of text-exchange in our digital communication. Call For ISF http://internetsocialforum.net/isf/?page_id=848 Tunis Resolution http://internetsocialforum.net/isf/?page_id=832 2) Parminder wrote: "As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of the World Social Forum..." Never this group can create a thematic forum of the World Social Forum for Internet. With this censors and autocrats like Norbert Bollow, Richard Hill and Michael Gurstein never we can create a World Internet Forum as a thematic forum of the WSF(FSM). It is a group of selfish oriented people, they support the Internet Governance. They support the centralized controll of the Internet. They speak about self organizing, but never they like it. And never they want accept it. We have to be clear, that the World Social Forum is a forum of the people in our world, on our planet. And not only the people from Europe or North America. Therefore, a World Internet Forum can only arise based on the people on our planet, based on equality, based on an open and free discussion. And not in this "clandestino" form like the ISF (Internet Social Forum). For our free InterNet, the free Interconnection of local Networks, based on the local/regional self organized creation of this transport system for digital data in packet form, we need the open space for our philosophical and technical design principles. It have to be a process in our space of free technology. Free to participate, free to use for all people on our planet. Then, and only then, the people local can create his part of the global digital interconnection for all people. Free and gratis. many greetings, willi Coro, Venezuela -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- Betreff: [governance] The Internet Social Forum initiative Datum: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:08:30 +0530 Von: parminder An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org , BestBitsList , Forum at Justnetcoalition. Org All There will be a brief presentation at the IGF of the Internet Social Forum initiative, and taking of questions and inputs, in an half an hour session on Friday the 13th in workshop room 2 at 2 PM. As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of the World Social Forum, It is planned to be held sometime late 2016. All are invited to come. parminder PS: Enclosed the initial call for an ISF, and the 'Tunis Call for a People's Internet' adopted at a workshop on the ISF initiative at the Worls Social Forum in Tunis is March 2015 From juca at members.fsf.org Fri Nov 13 09:59:00 2015 From: juca at members.fsf.org (Felipe Sanches) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 12:59:00 -0200 Subject: [bestbits] Microsoft unveils German data plan to tackle US internet spying Message-ID: Microsoft unveils German data plan to tackle US internet spying November 11, 2015 8:46 am Murad Ahmed in Berlin and Richard Waters in San Francisco Microsoft will allow foreign customers to hold data in new European facilities designed to shield customers from US government surveillance, in one of the most drastic corporate responses yet to the American internet spying scandal. On Wednesday, the US software company said it was setting up new data centres in Germany that will be under the control of Deutsche Telekom, the German telecommunications group. The legal and technical arrangement is intended to put the data of European government and business customers, along with millions of citizens, out of reach from US authorities. Technology analysts say it is a “watershed moment”, describing the manoeuvre as the first time a major US tech group had accepted its inability to protect customer data from US governmental over-reach. Microsoft’s initiative could have a ripple effect across the industry, creating a tough new privacy standard that customers may soon also demand from other “cloud computing” providers such as Google, Amazon and Oracle. Silicon Valley groups are struggling to regain the trust of European customers in the wake of disclosures by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden about widespread internet surveillance by US intelligence agencies. Mr Nadella told the Financial Times that the effort was designed to regain the trust of customers which had been lost as a result of the Snowden disclosures. “We need to earn both trust of our global customers and operate globally. That’s at the cornerstone of how we’ve done business and how we will continue to do business,” he said. In response, US tech groups have moved to build data centres in European countries. But many of the region’s customers remain unsatisfied that these efforts alone can protect against snooping. “I think Microsoft have come to the conclusion that they can’t get away from being a US company,” says Carsten Casper, analyst at Gartner, the research group. “I find that more honourable than others who try to move their data centres to Europe to appease customers, but how good is it to have data centres in those countries if you can access it from abroad with no particular problem?” Analysts say Microsoft’s concession could complicate negotiations between US and EU politicians on a new transatlantic data sharing pact known as “Safe Harbour”. Talks have been faltering for months over the thorny political issue of surveillance. Under Microsoft’s German arrangement, T-Systems, a Deutsche Telekom subsidiary, will operate two new data centre facilities in the country that will open for business in late 2016. They will be used solely to house information on Microsoft European customers, who will also be asked to pay more to store data in this way. But T-Systems will act as a “trustee” of the facilities, with Microsoft insisting its employees will have no access to the data held at the facilities without the German company’s permission. The companies believe this arrangement means Microsoft will not have to respond to governmental demands for information held in these data centres, forcing official requests to go through German authorities instead. Germany’s data protection laws, enforced by powerful privacy watchdogs, are considered to be among the continent’s strictest. The trustee solution is also a response to Microsoft’s legal battle against an order from a New York court, which is trying to force the software group to hand US authorities emails from a US citizen stored on a Microsoft server in Ireland. Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president and chief legal officer, has made the case a centrepiece of the company’s pushback against intrusive government demands for personal information, pledging to take the case to the US Supreme Court if necessary. Executives at rival technology companies are concerned about the implications of the high-profile case because of the precedent it will set in the running of their businesses. Microsoft’s German plan would address this issue, should it lose the case. But Paul Miller from Forrester Research says the trustee model is also likely to come under legal attack in the US. “As with all new legal approaches, we don’t know it is watertight until it is challenged in court,” he says. “Microsoft and T-Systems’ lawyers are very good and say its watertight. But we can be sure opposition lawyers will look for all the holes.” Last month, Europe gave a stinging rebuke to the transatlantic digital alliance, scrapping a 15-year pact that allowed US tech companies to ship personal information about European citizens wholesale to the US. The European Court of Justice decision to invalidate the “Safe Harbour” agreement has left thousands of businesses scrambling to change their legal footing to avoid breaking the law. Europe’s data protection authorities have given companies until January to find alternative data transfer agreements. The US and EU are working to secure a new Safe Harbour treaty but analysts say Microsoft’s decision may strengthen the resolve of EU diplomats who are holding out for stronger assurances over whether citizens data will be subsumed into the US surveillance regime. “I think it will put pressure on negotiators trying to reach a new transatlantic privacy agreement,” says Mr Casper. “There’s a new piece in the puzzle now.” source: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/540a296e-87ff-11e5-9f8c-a8d619fa707c.html#axzz3r4thbhrI (paywalled) From jmalcolm at eff.org Fri Nov 13 13:24:37 2015 From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 15:24:37 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] [governance] The Internet Social Forum initiative In-Reply-To: <5645F6AF.8080304@riseup.net> References: <5643ED96.3020705@itforchange.net> <5645F6AF.8080304@riseup.net> Message-ID: <56462AE5.1090204@eff.org> Please no ad hominem attacks on the Best Bits list. Non-personal critiques of particular initiatives of any kind are otherwise OK if relevant. But personal criticisms, whatever the source or target, are grounds for suspension from the list from now on. This rule has not been consistently applied in the past, but the results of our recent Best Bits survey give a clear mandate for the administrators to take a firmer hand in handling ad hominem attacks on the list. Thanks. On 13/11/2015 11:41 AM, willi uebelherr wrote: > (please: I use the lists for IUF and IGF, if i am member in this list. > If you answer, please check your membership) > > Dear friends. > > 1) I do not understand, why parminder append the texts and do not > write the link. He do not understand the principles of text-exchange > in our digital communication. > > Call For ISF > http://internetsocialforum.net/isf/?page_id=848 > Tunis Resolution > http://internetsocialforum.net/isf/?page_id=832 > > 2) Parminder wrote: > "As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of > the World Social Forum..." > > Never this group can create a thematic forum of the World Social Forum > for Internet. With this censors and autocrats like Norbert Bollow, > Richard Hill and Michael Gurstein never we can create a World Internet > Forum as a thematic forum of the WSF(FSM). It is a group of selfish > oriented people, they support the Internet Governance. They support > the centralized controll of the Internet. They speak about self > organizing, but never they like it. And never they want accept it. > > We have to be clear, that the World Social Forum is a forum of the > people in our world, on our planet. And not only the people from > Europe or North America. Therefore, a World Internet Forum can only > arise based on the people on our planet, based on equality, based on > an open and free discussion. And not in this "clandestino" form like > the ISF (Internet Social Forum). > > For our free InterNet, the free Interconnection of local Networks, > based on the local/regional self organized creation of this transport > system for digital data in packet form, we need the open space for our > philosophical and technical design principles. It have to be a process > in our space of free technology. Free to participate, free to use for > all people on our planet. Then, and only then, the people local can > create his part of the global digital interconnection for all people. > Free and gratis. > > many greetings, willi > Coro, Venezuela > > > -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- > Betreff: [governance] The Internet Social Forum initiative > Datum: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 07:08:30 +0530 > Von: parminder > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org , > BestBitsList , Forum at Justnetcoalition. > Org > > All > > There will be a brief presentation at the IGF of the Internet Social > Forum initiative, and taking of questions and inputs, in an half an hour > session on Friday the 13th in workshop room 2 at 2 PM. > > As many of you will know Internet Social Forum is a thematic forum of > the World Social Forum, It is planned to be held sometime late 2016. > > All are invited to come. > > parminder > > PS: Enclosed the initial call for an ISF, and the 'Tunis Call for a > People's Internet' adopted at a workshop on the ISF initiative at the > Worls Social Forum in Tunis is March 2015 > > > -- Jeremy Malcolm Senior Global Policy Analyst Electronic Frontier Foundation https://eff.org jmalcolm at eff.org Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161 :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World :: Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220 OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide: https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 204 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From lea at gp-digital.org Fri Nov 13 13:51:05 2015 From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar) Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2015 18:51:05 +0000 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement Message-ID: Dear friends, For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in Brazil! Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have led on an effort to draft *a short 1-page statement with key priorities* shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement is *to reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude additional independent or joint interventions/comments. The statement has already received broad support from the technical and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see below). It is *now open for additional organisational endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil).* If you would like to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from ISOC (Constance Bommelaer < bommelaer at isoc.org>). Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this space. Best wishes, Lea --- Organisational CS endorsements so far: - Internet Democracy Project, India - Global Partners Digital, UK - Public Knowledge, US - ICT Watch, Indonesia - Bytes for All, Pakistan - Horizontal, Mexico - Law Life Culture, Bangladesh - Center for Democracy & Technology, US - CIPESA, Uganda --- *Lea Kaspar* Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspar gp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: WSIS10 X-community statement_JP.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 18614 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mishi at softwarefreedom.org Sat Nov 14 09:15:50 2015 From: mishi at softwarefreedom.org (Mishi Choudhary) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 11:15:50 -0300 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement Message-ID: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> SFLC.in endorses it as well.  Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device -------- Original message -------- From: Lea Kaspar Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) To: Best Bits , wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net Cc: Constance Bommelaer , york at isoc.org Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement Dear friends,  For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in Brazil! Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have led on an effort to draft a short 1-page statement with key priorities shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed back to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement is to reinforce our common messages - it does not preclude additional independent or joint interventions/comments. The statement has already received broad support from the technical and the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see below). It is now open for additional organisational endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil). If you would like to endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know by 6PM today and share your organisational logo copying in Constance from ISOC (Constance Bommelaer ). Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited via the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this space. Best wishes,Lea --- Organisational CS endorsements so far: Internet Democracy Project, India Global Partners Digital, UK Public Knowledge, US ICT Watch, Indonesia Bytes for All, Pakistan Horizontal, Mexico Law Life Culture, Bangladesh Center for Democracy & Technology, US CIPESA, Uganda--- Lea KasparHead of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITALDevelopment House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LTT: +44 (0)20 7549 0337 | M: +44 (0)7583 929216 | Skype: l.kaspargp-digital.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jeanette at wzb.eu Sat Nov 14 09:19:13 2015 From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann) Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 15:19:13 +0100 Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 statement In-Reply-To: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> References: <14yl3brit3f8nws8f120pxq9.1447510550090@email.android.com> Message-ID: <564742E1.6090708@wzb.eu> I don't understand why this statement focuses so much on organizations. I also found it a bit wishi washi. Best, Jeanette Am 14.11.15 um 15:15 schrieb Mishi Choudhary: > SFLC.in endorses it as well. > > > > Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: Lea Kaspar > Date: 11/13/2015 15:51 (GMT-03:00) > To: Best Bits , wsis10 at lists.bestbits.net > Cc: Constance Bommelaer , york at isoc.org > Subject: [bestbits] CALL FOR ENDORSEMENTS - Cross-community WSIS10 > statement > > Dear friends, > > For those of you at the IGF, I hope you're enjoying your last day in Brazil! > > Over the past few days, colleagues from the technical community have led > on an effort to draft _*a short 1-page statement with key > priorities*_ shared across non-governmental stakeholders to be fed back > to the WSIS10 Review process in NY. The idea behind the statement is *to > reinforce our common messages* - it does not preclude additional > independent or joint interventions/comments. > > The statement has already received broad support from the technical and > the business communities as well as a number of CS colleagues (see > below). It is *_now open for additional organisational > endorsements until 6PM today local time (Brazil)._* If you would like to > endorse (and have not already done so), please let me know *by 6PM > today* and share *your organisational logo* copying in Constance from > ISOC (Constance Bommelaer >). > > Further organisational and individual endorsements will be solicited via > the webpage where the statement will be posted shortly. Watch this space. > > Best wishes, > Lea > > --- > > Organisational CS endorsements so far: > > * Internet Democracy Project, India > * Global Partners Digital, UK > * Public Knowledge, US > * ICT Watch, Indonesia > * Bytes for All, Pakistan > * Horizontal, Mexico > * Law Life Culture, Bangladesh > * Center for Democracy & Technology, US > * CIPESA, Uganda > > --- > > *Lea Kaspar* > > Head of Programmes and International Policy | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL > > Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT > > T: +44 (0)20 7549 0337| M: +44 (0)7583 929216| Skype: l.kaspar > > gp-digital.org > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > You received this message as a subscriber on the list: > bestbits at lists.bestbits.net. > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: > http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits >