<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<font face="Verdana">Chile too now is an OECD member.....<br>
<br>
On the larger issue, I am rather surprised and disappointed at the
robust support from developing country people of the OECD 'global'
Internet policy making model - both the process and substance of
which being hugely problematic.... I dont have the time right now
to engage into a discussion, but could not resist expressing my
strong feeling in general about the issue...<br>
<br>
Democracy is in itself important, it is not a
if-we-disregard-the-process-issue thing..... And BTW, when it
comes to multistakeholderism, the same
lets-for-the-moment-disregard-the-process-issue proposition never
seems not to apply. Is multistakeholderism then a higher value
than democracy?<br>
<br>
OECD is a centre price of 'global' Internet policy making today,
which is then exported through one to one or plurilateral deals to
developing countries... It is a fact that many developing
countries fall prey to this unprincipled approach on narrow short
term self interest consideration.... And playing developing
countires against one another through such short term deals is a
major US/ OECD method of spreading their regime globally. This is
a major axis of global digital domination.. Civil society
interested in democratic values should simply and roundly
criticise such models of global policy making. That is the only
basic attitude that can be taken towards them. <br>
<br>
The developing countries who have signed some of the mentioned
OECD documents, are never a part of the core discussions, agenda
framing and final formulation -- and so to pass off their sign on
as a measure of they being a part of the process is a very
undemocratic take..... Rest later.... parmidner <br>
<br>
<br>
</font>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 09 October 2013 07:14 PM,
Carlos A. Afonso wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:52555DD2.6000004@cafonso.ca" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">To add some more "spice": both Chile and Mexico are still developing
countries (may be listed as "emerging countries" in some circles), and
while Chile is not in the OECD, Mexico is.
--c.a.
On 10/08/2013 11:47 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Pranesh,
You are providing a very peculiar list of "developing" countries--"Chile,
Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Senegal, Turkey".
Of which three belong to the EU (Hungary, Latvia, Poland), one is a very
strong aspirant to the EU (Turkey), and two others are very strong aspirants
(based on income) to the OECD (Chile and Mexico)...
By my, and I believe most reckonings there are 3 actual DC's in your list
(from some 130?? or so)--India, Indonesia, and Senegal--hardly a sufficient
number to be drawing any useful conclusions from.
M
-----Original Message-----
From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a>
[<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net">mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net</a>] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 10:04 PM
To: Jeremy Malcolm; <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Outcome of cyberspace conference in Seoul
A top note that the OECD principles are actually
OECD+Egypt+Business+Tech principles, which CISAC helped shape but didn't
sign on to. Rest inline:
Jeremy Malcolm [2013-10-08 00:04]:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 08/10/13 09:21, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Focussing on the policymaking principles outlined in the OECD communiqu:
apart from process related issues of lack of representation of
developing world governments, in terms of substance how would a
statement of principles that had developing world participation look
different?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
There is only one way to find out, and that is to deal with the
process related issues. But for a rough idea, we can look at the
Brazilian Principles for the Governance and Use of the Internet.
Notable additions compared to the OECD principles:
* *Universality:* Internet access must be universal so that it becomes
a tool for human and social development, thereby contributing to the
formation of an inclusive and nondiscriminatory society, for the
benefit of all
* *Standardization and interoperability:* The Internet must be based
on open standards that facilitate interoperability and enable all to
participate in its development
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
On standards, the OECD principles (under "Promote the open, distributed and
interconnected nature of the Internet") states:
"The Internet's openness also stems from globally accepted, consensus driven
technical standards that support global product markets and communications.
The roles, openness, and competencies of the global multi-stakeholder
institutions that govern standards for different layers of Internet
components should be recognised and their contribution should be sought on
the different technical elements of public policy objectives."
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> * *Neutrality of the network:* Filtering or traffic privileges must
meet ethical and technical criteria only, excluding any political,
commercial, religious and cultural factors or any other form of
discrimination or preferential treatment
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
"Maintaining technology neutrality and appropriate quality for all Internet
services is also important to ensure an open and dynamic Internet
environment. Provision of open Internet access services is critical for the
Internet economy."
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">and notable omissions:
* Promote investment and competition in high speed networks and
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">services;
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> * Promote and enable the cross-border delivery of services;
* Foster voluntarily developed codes of conduct;
* Maximise individual empowerment;
* Give appropriate priority to enforcement efforts.
More could be written about this, but there is a very different
emphasis with the OECD principles much more individualistic and biased
towards trade, than the Brazilian principles.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
OECD is primarily about economic/trade issues (though not solely about such
issues), so that bias is perhaps to be expected. In the 2008 Seoul
Declaration for the Future of the Internet Economy, there were 10 developing
countries (Chile, Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Latvia, Mexico, Poland,
Senegal, Turkey) represented in the 39 individual countries that signed the
declaration. Sure, the developing countries were outnumbered 3:1, but they
still agreed to:
* Ensure respect for intellectual property rights.
* Create a market-friendly environment for convergence that encourages
infrastructure investment, higher levels of connectivity and innovative
services and applications.
* Promote Internet-based innovation, competition, and user choice.
* Acting as a key driver for the creation of enterprises and communities and
stimulating closer global co-operation.
* Promote the secure and responsible use of the Internet that respects
international social and ethical norms and that increases transparency and
accountability.
* Establish a regulatory environment that assures a level playing field for
competition.
* Stimulate investment and competition in the development of high capacity
information and communication infrastructures and the delivery of
Internet-enabled services within and across borders.
* Maintain an open environment that supports the free flow of information,
research, innovation, entrepreneurship and business transformation.
* Combine efforts to combat digital piracy with innovative approaches which
provide creators and rights holders with incentives to create and
disseminate works in a manner that is beneficial to creators, users and our
economies as a whole.
* Increase cross-border co-operation of governments and enforcement
authorities in the areas of improving cyber-security, combating spam, as
well as protecting privacy, consumers and minors.
* Empowering consumers and users in online transactions and exchanges.
Most (all?) of the things that you'd think developing countries would omit
were accepted by 10 of them. Just sayin'.
Cheers,
Pranesh
--
Pranesh Prakash
Policy Director
Centre for Internet and Society
T: +91 80 40926283 | W: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://cis-india.org">http://cis-india.org</a> PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter:
@pranesh_prakash
-------------------+
Postgraduate Associate & Access to Knowledge Fellow Information Society
Project, Yale Law School
T: +1 520 314 7147 | W: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://yaleisp.org">http://yaleisp.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>