<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body >At least suggest times and places to address these matters in an open transparent manner with broad stakeholder engagement. ....just like Brazil is supposed to be<br><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette@wzb.eu> <br>Date: 02/04/2014 7:28 AM (GMT-05:00) <br>To: "Mike Godwin (mgodwin@INTERNEWS.ORG)" <mgodwin@INTERNEWS.ORG>,genekimmelman@gmail.com,jeremy@ciroap.org,bestbits@lists.bestbits.net <br>Subject: Re: [bestbits] substantive proposals for Brazil summit - IG governance <br> <br><br>Hi, I am not arguing against a substantive agenda as such. Who would??<br>However, we should not overlook operational issues and find a solution <br>for them. One of those issues concerns the decision making authority of <br>the attendees of the Brazil meeting. Put in more general terms, what do <br>you expect the meeting to do about the substantive agenda?<br><br>jeanette<br><br>Am 04.02.2014 13:20, schrieb Mike Godwin (mgodwin@INTERNEWS.ORG):<br>><br>> I strongly agree with Gene and Andrew about the need to have a clear,<br>> targeted, and (ideally) short substantive civil-society agenda going<br>> forward to Brazil. Frankly, I almost don’t care what what the specifics<br>> of that substantive agenda are, but the timeline is excruciatingly<br>> short, the window of opportunity is limited, and if want to take away<br>> something substantive from Brazil we have to commit to a substantive<br>> agenda now.<br>><br>> I’m not terribly troubled if someone later says the agenda should be, or<br>> should have been different. Brazil is a unique opportunity, and it will<br>> be shame if it goes to waste because civil society focused more on<br>> process and consensus than on extracting substantive value from the<br>> opportunity Brazil represents.<br>><br>><br>> —Mike<br>><br>><br>> --<br>><br>> *Mike Godwin* | Senior Legal Advisor, Global Internet Policy Project<br>><br>> mgodwin@internews.org <mailto:mgodwin@internews.org> | *Mobile* 415-793-4446<br>><br>> *Skype* mnemonic1026<br>><br>> *Address* 1601 R Street NW, 2nd Floor Washington, DC 20009 USA<br>><br>> *INTERNEWS*|***Local Voices. Global Change.*<br>><br>> www.internews.org <http://www.internews.org/> | @internews<br>> <http://www.twitter.com/internews> | facebook.com/internews<br>> <http://www.facebook.com/internews><br>><br>><br>> From: "genekimmelman@gmail.com <mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com>"<br>> <genekimmelman@gmail.com <mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com>><br>> Reply-To: "genekimmelman@gmail.com <mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com>"<br>> <genekimmelman@gmail.com <mailto:genekimmelman@gmail.com>><br>> Date: Tuesday, February 4, 2014 at 7:16 AM<br>> To: "jeremy@ciroap.org <mailto:jeremy@ciroap.org>" <jeremy@ciroap.org<br>> <mailto:jeremy@ciroap.org>>, "bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br>> <mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>" <bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br>> <mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net>><br>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] substantive proposals for Brazil summit - IG<br>> governance<br>><br>> I think it would be a big mistake to avoid substance. Expand or adjust<br>> the list as you like, but let's give Brazil a chance to a starting point<br>> for progress on our most important policy concerns. Who cares if others<br>> disagree? We need to adequately represent civil society. And then the<br>> discussions and negotiations can begin. ...<br>><br>> The three broad areas Andrew suggests were what many signed on at the<br>> Baku best bits meeting<br>><br>><br>><br>> -------- Original message --------<br>> From: Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy@ciroap.org <mailto:jeremy@ciroap.org>><br>> Date: 02/04/2014 2:31 AM (GMT-05:00)<br>> To: bestbits@lists.bestbits.net <mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net><br>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] substantive proposals for Brazil summit - IG<br>> governance<br>><br>><br>> On 03/02/14 23:09, Andrew Puddephatt wrote:<br>>> Three examples might be:<br>>><br>>> 1.Net neutrality<br>>><br>>> 2.Protection for personal privacy<br>>><br>>> 3.Affordable access<br>>><br>>> We could say that whatever arrangements on governance are considered<br>>> that we call on governments and other stakeholders to guarantee these<br>>> three objectives both at the international level and in national<br>>> policies.<br>>><br>>> I would have thought we have a fighting chance of getting endorsement<br>>> for this in a two day conference<br>>><br>><br>> I have my doubts. If we start cherry-picking issues, where will we<br>> stop? The technical community will say "Well if we're including net<br>> neutrality, why not IPv6 transition?" Civil society colleages will say<br>> (and quite rightly) "If privacy, why not freedom of expression?" etc.<br>> Also, within your examples, affordable access falls into a different<br>> category than the other two, having less to do with global public policy<br>> principles.<br>><br>> I can see the wisdom of the original pronouncement that we wouldn't be<br>> dealing with particular substantive issues, but rather on cross-cutting<br>> principles and mechanisms.<br>><br>> --<br>><br>> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br>> Senior Policy Officer<br>> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers*<br>> Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East<br>> Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,<br>> Malaysia<br>> Tel: +60 3 7726 1599<br>><br>> *WCRD 2014 - Fix Our Phone Rights!* |<br>> http://consint.info/fix-our-phone-rights<br>><br>> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org<br>> <http://www.consumersinternational.org> |<br>> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational<br>> <http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational><br>><br>> Read our email confidentiality notice<br>> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't<br>> print this email unless necessary.<br>><br>> *WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly<br>> recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For<br>> instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.<br>><br>><br>><br>> Click here<br>> <https://www.mailcontrol.com/sr/1nnqozLiUZrGX2PQPOmvUmkxeMeR4%21Fm5mrXAAqtPhHw0dtgxxelXmSzKLPN3ZpuS7o6O6eqjJaSPFO0UaI8cQ==><br>> to report this email as spam.<br>><br></body>