<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Same concerns remain. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">Thank you for such clarification, in any case. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">R</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Carlos Afonso <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ca@cafonso.ca" target="_blank">ca@cafonso.ca</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">> Carlos, can you share information about plans to reopen the text for<br>
> discussion?<br>
<br></span>
With pleasure: it is called NETmundial Initiative.<br>
<br>
fraternal regards<br>
<br>
--c.a.<span class=""><br>
<br>
On 11/20/14 16:47, Renata Avila wrote:<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Dear all,<br>
<br><span class="">
Happy to clarify my email, if it was not clear enough. I am also<br>
including the maps I did not include in my previous email.<br>
<br>
Again, there are no indications of opening and continuing revising the<br>
draft document. If there is a process to reopen the document and improve<br>
it, please indicate it. I know Net Mundial was considered by many a huge<br>
achievement and consensus. For the three reasons I explained before<br>
<br>
1. Weak anti surveillance language<br>
2. Inclusion of copyright provisions<br>
3. Lack of South input, from all sectors<br>
<br>
I have always considered quite incomplete. If it is an open discussion<br>
and there will be an engaging process to "fix it" then it is a different<br>
conversation.<br>
<br>
Carlos, can you share information about plans to reopen the text for<br>
discussion?<br>
<br>
With respect,<br>
<br>
Renata<br>
<br>
On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 12:34 PM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global<br>
Journal <<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.<u></u>net</a><br></span><div><div class="h5">
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
Is this all what you read/oppose in Renata's email? There ought to<br>
be no limit to sincerely try to understand what someone else is<br>
formulating rather brilliantly and so rightfully. So tell us more<br>
about what is silly here?<br>
<br>
<br>
Le 20 nov. 2014 à 19:04, Carlos Afonso a écrit :<br>
<br>
> Where is it stated that the declaration of São Paulo (principles<br>
and roadmap of NETmundial) are "final"??<br>
><br>
> --c.a.<br>
><br>
> On 11/20/14 10:47, Renata Avila wrote:<br>
>> Dear all,<br>
>><br>
>> I do not write often in this list, but, as I made it clear<br>
earlier at<br>
>> the closing ceremony of Net Mundial Initiative, I am really<br>
concerned at<br>
>> any effort adopting the Net Mundial ¨final¨ outcome as such, as<br>
final.<br>
>> Mrs. Rousseff started her crusade as an effort to tackle or at<br>
least,<br>
>> somehow, regulate the pervasive surveillance from a group of<br>
governments<br>
>> against all citizens. The result was a monster, the process was<br>
flawed,<br>
>> the language against massive surveillance was weak, the<br>
introduction the<br>
>> language to please the copyright lobby really undermined solid,<br>
>> multiyear efforts of the copyright reformists, too. Adopting such<br>
>> document, which so far is just the result of an event outside the<br>
>> regular events around Internet Governance is simply dangerous<br>
and silly,<br>
>> because in no way is a big victory for two of the most important<br>
battles<br>
>> for the future of our knowledge societies, of our free societies. A<br>
>> rigid exam, or even an exam at first sight of the outcome<br>
document will<br>
>> show that it certainly fails to adopt the highest human rights<br>
standards.<br>
>><br>
>> The other issue was participation. As you can see in the<br>
brilliant work<br>
>> by CIS India <a href="http://ajantriks.github.io/netmundial/index.html" target="_blank">http://ajantriks.github.io/<u></u>netmundial/index.html</a><br>
and the<br>
>> attached maps, the voices from the global south, especially the<br>
poorest<br>
>> countries from Africa and Latin America, where largely missing<br>
in the<br>
>> debates. It was a North lead debate. It was a highly specialised<br>
debate,<br>
>> but, paradoxically, with terrible flaws as there were Internet<br>
>> Governance experts, but, except for the very good contributions of<br>
>> privacy experts like Jacob Appelbaum and Copyright experts like<br>
Mishi,<br>
>> there was a vast lack of expertise, or at least no unity in key<br>
demands.<br>
>><br>
>> So for me, in spite of the good faith of the Brazilians, any<br>
effort that<br>
>> will marry with the Net Mundial Final Document as such, as final, is<br>
>> flawed and has very little reform or even information potential for<br>
>> Civil Society. Because we will not be asking for and promoting the<br>
>> adoption of higher but lower standards, because the whole<br>
exercise lacks<br>
>> the voices and concerns for the very actors which will be the most<br>
>> affected by the adoption of such principles and roadmap as the one<br>
>> forward and because, again, very few of those who are not<br>
represented<br>
>> will be able to afford the time and resources that such initiative<br>
>> demands. So it will be again, a conversation among few.<br>
>><br>
>> There is also the public v. private interest here, but that<br>
issue has<br>
>> been discussed extensively. My concern is basically the<br>
legitimacy we<br>
>> are giving to such disastrous outcome, reaching and promoting a<br>
new low.<br>
>><br>
>> * This is a personal opinion and in no way reflects the opinion or<br>
>> position of the Web Foundation.<br>
>><br>
>> Renata<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 6:20 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The<br>
Global<br>
>> Journal <<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.<u></u>net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>><br></div></div>
>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a><div><div class="h5"><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>>>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Jeanette,<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks for sharing Anja's skepticism. But Anja has expressed,<br>
more<br>
>> importantly in my opinion, precise questions and given detailed<br>
>> information that ignited her skepticism. Where are the answers to<br>
>> her questions? Anriette has made suggestions: where are the<br>
>> reactions? Talking about relevant actors: is WEF a relevant<br>
actor?<br>
>> WEF is a network of corporations, big ones. Shouldn't civil<br>
society<br>
>> engage instead the smaller entrepreneurs, who creates much<br>
more jobs<br>
>> that the WEF membership? What is the criteria to say that it is<br>
>> worth to engage WEF rather than other groupings? WEF has a high<br>
>> media added-value. I agree, but then just ask for a tribune in<br>
>> Davos, to start with.<br>
>><br>
>> You question the qualified and trustworthy candidates, fine,<br>
but you<br>
>> totally ignore to answer the pending questions by many of us:<br>
what<br>
>> is this all about? Is this process worth the effort and, if<br>
NUY lab<br>
>> is already elaborating the written conclusions of the<br>
initiative, do<br>
>> we need to bother to write the conclusions of it with any<br>
qualified<br>
>> and trustworthy candidate. If so, you should revise your<br>
judgement<br>
>> and buy the argument (no copyright on this!) that those who are<br>
>> willing to get involved are doing this for career purposes. Some<br>
>> have already got their career boosted at ICANN and a few<br>
other cool<br>
>> places, might feel that it would be smart for those without a<br>
>> comfortable seat to join the carrousel of vanities.<br>
>><br>
>> Thanks<br>
>> JC<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Le 20 nov. 2014 à 12:43, Jeanette Hofmann a écrit :<br>
>><br>
>>> Hi all, I share Anja's skepticism but also Anriette's more<br>
>>> principled stance on participating in new processes. We need to<br>
>>> communicate with relevant actors in this field. Ultimately I<br>
think<br>
>>> the pragmatic question is if we find a sufficient number of<br>
>>> qualified and trustworthy candidates who are willing to<br>
contribute<br>
>>> on our behalf in the NMI. Whether or not we have experienced<br>
>>> people who want to participate is a valuable indicator in<br>
itself,<br>
>>> don't you agree? (I don't buy the well-known argument that those<br>
>>> who are willing to get involved do this for career purposes.)<br>
>>> Jeanette<br>
>>><br>
>>> On 20 November 2014 11:49:06 CET, Ian Peter<br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" target="_blank">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" target="_blank">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a><u></u>><br></div></div><div><div class="h5">
<mailto:<a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" target="_blank">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ian.peter@ianpeter.com" target="_blank">ian.peter@ianpeter.com</a><u></u>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>> Thanks Nnenna.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Yes, it is disappointing when we cannot tolerate differences of<br>
>>>> opinion.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Anriette expressed respect for the JNC position, as have<br>
many others.<br>
>>>> It would be good if this respect for differing opinions was<br>
>>>> reciprocated.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The most substantial side effect for civil society<br>
discourse when<br>
>>>> someones personal opinion is attacked rather than respected<br>
is that<br>
>>>> people stop expressing themselves for fear of being<br>
attacked. It<br>
>>>> would<br>
>>>> be good if we concentrated on issues and arguing points of<br>
view. And<br>
>>>> some voices have already been silenced on this issue.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> We are not all going to agree on this one. But perhaps we can<br>
>>>> agree to<br>
>>>> respect differences of opinion.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Anriette has devoted the last 25 or so years of her life to<br>
building<br>
>>>> APC as “ an international network and non profit<br>
organisation that<br>
>>>> wants everyone to have access to a free and open internet<br>
to improve<br>
>>>> our lives and create a more just world”. No, she is not<br>
>>>> abandoning the<br>
>>>> pursuit of social justice.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Ian Peter<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> From: Nnenna Nwakanma<br>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 9:26 PM<br>
>>>> To: michael gurstein<br>
>>>> Cc: Anriette Esterhuysen ; Anja Kovacs ; Governance ; Best Bits<br>
>>>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Whether to participate in<br>
>>>> NETmundial Initiative - RFC<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Wow! This "new reality" called Civil Society is beginning<br>
to amaze me<br>
>>>> the more. Because someone thinks "Let us give something a<br>
shot, it is<br>
>>>> not perfect, but it is making an effort" then it is being<br>
>>>> construed as<br>
>>>> abandoning the pursuit of social justice?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> If there was a human being who fought for social justice,<br>
it was<br>
>>>> Nelson<br>
>>>> Mandela. And it is him who said:<br>
>>>> "If you want to make peace with your enemy, you have to<br>
work with<br>
>>>> your<br>
>>>> enemy. Then he becomes your partner."<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I will rest my case for now<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Nnenna<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:13 AM, michael gurstein<br>
>>>> <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>><br></div></div>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com" target="_blank">gurstein@gmail.com</a>>>><span class=""><br>
>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> So Anriette, I’m taking from your argument that because the NMI<br>
>>>> offers<br>
>>>> some possibility, however remote for the advancement of<br>
human rights,<br>
>>>> you are completely abandoning perhaps irrevocably, the<br>
pursuit of<br>
>>>> social justice.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> M<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> From: <a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a>><br>
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a>>><br></span>
>>>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a><div><div class="h5"><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a>><br>
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits-request@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits-request@<u></u>lists.bestbits.net</a>>>] On Behalf Of Anriette<br>
>>>> Esterhuysen<br>
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:18 PM<br>
>>>> To: Anja Kovacs; Nnenna Nwakanma<br>
>>>> Cc: Governance; Best Bits<br>
>>>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Whether to participate in<br>
>>>> NETmundial Initiative - RFC<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Dear all<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I have been fairly silent on this issue and APC is<br>
consulting our<br>
>>>> members about it at present. We have been really busy in<br>
APC with<br>
>>>> project meetings, evaluations, planning, and also the African<br>
>>>> School on<br>
>>>> IG, so apologies for not participating.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Anja, thanks for asking for the view of Brazilian<br>
colleagues. I have<br>
>>>> also asked people off list and thus far I get the sense<br>
that while<br>
>>>> there are concerns, there is also a sense that it is worth<br>
giving the<br>
>>>> process a try.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I felt that the the letter that Ian and the CSCG wrote was<br>
excellent,<br>
>>>> and I feel that having them in place has put us in a stronger<br>
>>>> position.<br>
>>>> I also feel that JNC's decision to not be part of the<br>
process is<br>
>>>> legitimate and clear.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I do see the pros and cons of participation a bit differently<br>
>>>> from how<br>
>>>> Ian had put them in an earlier message...perhaps not quite<br>
as 'black<br>
>>>> and white'.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> My feeling at this point is that some of the strong concerns we<br>
>>>> expressed at the time of the NETmundial Initiative Launch<br>
in late<br>
>>>> August have actually been addressed.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I don't particularly like the process... I would have liked<br>
more<br>
>>>> transparency and consultation around the redesign of the<br>
process and<br>
>>>> its mechanisms.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> But I really do care about the NETmundial outcomes, and I<br>
believe we<br>
>>>> should do our best to take it forward, to intergovernmental<br>
>>>> spaces, at<br>
>>>> national level, and through the IGF. This might sound pretty<br>
>>>> naive to<br>
>>>> many but I still believe that the only sustainable path to<br>
inclusive<br>
>>>> democratic multistakeholder internet policy and regulation<br>
is through<br>
>>>> closer connections between multistakeholder and<br>
intergovernmental<br>
>>>> processes and mechanisms.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I am at the airport and about to board.. so should be fast.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> My view would be that civil society participates in the NMI<br>
with the<br>
>>>> following:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - a set of indicators and criteriat that are important to us<br>
>>>> - a limited timeframe<br>
>>>> - agreed milestones including for a point at which we assess<br>
>>>> whether we<br>
>>>> continue or not<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> My proposal would be try and make the process work, and to<br>
link it<br>
>>>> closely to the IGF and for civil society e.g. at Best Bits<br>
meeting to<br>
>>>> get together prior to the 2015 IGF and then to assess<br>
whether our<br>
>>>> particpation has had impact, whether we have been able to<br>
>>>> influence the<br>
>>>> process and whether it meets the criteria important to us.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> This is a risk of course. And we could legitimise a process<br>
that<br>
>>>> turns<br>
>>>> out not to be worthy of it. But I think it is a risk worth<br>
>>>> taking, and<br>
>>>> we can always withdraw.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Not trying is a greater risk as it could result in the most<br>
>>>> progressive, to date, agreement on principles that respect<br>
human<br>
>>>> rights<br>
>>>> inclusive processes in internet governance simply fizzling<br>
out. I<br>
>>>> think that backtracking in that way on what we all achieved<br>
>>>> through the<br>
>>>> NETmundial would be a huge loss to changing how we think<br>
about, and<br>
>>>> implement, internet governance.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Anriette<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On 19/11/2014 21:59, Anja Kovacs wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Dear all,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> A question. If any of the Brazilians on these lists could<br>
perhaps<br>
>>>> shed<br>
>>>> some light on why their government has decided to support this<br>
>>>> initiative, and how they see it, that could possibly be very<br>
>>>> helpful? I<br>
>>>> have had great respect for Brazil and its work in the past,<br>
and can't<br>
>>>> help but wonder whether I'm missing something here.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> For the moment, however, knowing what I know, I am still not in<br>
>>>> favour<br>
>>>> of civil society networks giving this their stamp of<br>
approval (though<br>
>>>> as earlier, I also don't have an issue with individual<br>
organisations<br>
>>>> who want to participate to continue doing so and report<br>
back to the<br>
>>>> wider community). A WEF-ICANN alliance, even if backed by the<br>
>>>> Brazilian<br>
>>>> government, is just not the place I want to see emerge as a<br>
new power<br>
>>>> centre in Internet governance - even less so as they have<br>
already<br>
>>>> given<br>
>>>> themselves some fixed seats.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I've in particular been wondering what this selection and<br>
committee<br>
>>>> means seeing that some of the initiatives the NMI would<br>
"foster"<br>
>>>> clearly are already on the way. For example, I (and I know many<br>
>>>> others<br>
>>>> on this list too) have already been contacted by the Governance<br>
>>>> Lab at<br>
>>>> NYU to give feedback on a proposed NETmundial Solutions map<br>
that<br>
>>>> would<br>
>>>> be developed under the flag of the NMI. It's difficult not to<br>
>>>> feel like<br>
>>>> the only thing we and others would be doing is simply to<br>
rubberstamp<br>
>>>> things that would happen anyway - but because we okay them,<br>
>>>> somehow the<br>
>>>> structure and the initiatives it gives birth to gain a<br>
legitimacy<br>
>>>> that<br>
>>>> they would not have had without. An unwise use of our<br>
power, I would<br>
>>>> say (that they would go ahead without us anyway is<br>
something that a<br>
>>>> representative from the WEF made clear enough to me in an<br>
informal<br>
>>>> conversation in October. Some of the individual initiative,<br>
such as<br>
>>>> that map, might have value, but about the structure as a<br>
whole, I am<br>
>>>> not so certain)<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I would feel far more comfortable if we would instead start<br>
exploring<br>
>>>> the constructive ways of going ahead with our own work<br>
suggested by<br>
>>>> Amelia and others. I would love to hear more about what they're<br>
>>>> thinking, and how we could operationalize this ourselves<br>
and take it<br>
>>>> forward.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Thanks and best,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Anja<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On 19 November 2014 01:12, Nnenna Nwakanma<br>
<<a href="mailto:nnenna75@gmail.com" target="_blank">nnenna75@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:nnenna75@gmail.com" target="_blank">nnenna75@gmail.com</a>><br></div></div><div><div class="h5">
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:nnenna75@gmail.com" target="_blank">nnenna75@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:nnenna75@gmail.com" target="_blank">nnenna75@gmail.com</a>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Dear Governance and Best Bits listers, and especially<br>
African Civil<br>
>>>> Society members here.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> My opinion is that Civil Society should participate. It is<br>
okay to<br>
>>>> table our "fears" and let NMI know that our participation<br>
may be<br>
>>>> withdrawn if XYZ is not met.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I think it is fine for certain networks to say "No", but in<br>
Africa, I<br>
>>>> dont think we should miss out.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> NMI may also just make a public call for CS who wants to<br>
>>>> participate.<br>
>>>> From the launch, I already saw that some CS persons were<br>
already very<br>
>>>> interested in the NMI.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I see it is okay if one network or list or platform<br>
decides NOT to<br>
>>>> participate but we cannot ask others not to.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Me, I am in favour of Governance and BB lists nominating<br>
people.<br>
>>>> And at<br>
>>>> the same time, saying that it is important for African S to<br>
>>>> participate.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> All for now<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Nnenna<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I<br>
The Global<br>
>>>> Journal <<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.<u></u>net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>><br></div></div>
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a><div><div class="h5"><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Jeremy,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Thanks for your email.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Looking after pathologies is certainly a noble cause, but as we<br>
>>>> both do<br>
>>>> not belong to the medical corpus, maybe it would simply be<br>
wise to<br>
>>>> terminate this, and cool down a bit. Even though we are in real<br>
>>>> politics.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Go after the arguments put on the table is probably of<br>
better effect<br>
>>>> and impact.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> What I wanted to say using quotes from an array of observers or<br>
>>>> participants is that the initiative has more than a<br>
troubling set of<br>
>>>> definitions, expectations and leading to an overall<br>
confusion. It<br>
>>>> looks<br>
>>>> more or less like "un chèque en blanc" to illegitimate<br>
grouping of a<br>
>>>> wealthy elite (the three players of NMI have deep pockets, and<br>
>>>> friends<br>
>>>> with deeper pockets). I am not even trying to clarify the<br>
obvious<br>
>>>> tactics behind all their gesture. I had an intermezzo as a<br>
consultant<br>
>>>> for 10 years in my life, and can more than easily read the<br>
partition<br>
>>>> behind all of that smoking screen. In the army, you always<br>
call some<br>
>>>> troopers from the "génie" when you need a screen of smoke<br>
to cross a<br>
>>>> street, a bridge or a simple line. No, let's stay on what<br>
is at stake<br>
>>>> such as<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - why part of civil society in Busan accepted the fact that<br>
the US<br>
>>>> refused to discuss mass surveillance?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - why is the IGF not the best bet for civil society to keep<br>
maturing<br>
>>>> and growing?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - why is encryption, I know EFF is working hard on this topic,<br>
>>>> insufficiently at the center of the IG debate? Isn't encryption<br>
>>>> part of<br>
>>>> the mass surveillance issue? So then why to please the US,<br>
in Sao<br>
>>>> Paulo, then in Busan by refusing to really go after it? Mass<br>
>>>> surveillance has nothing to do with IG they told us.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - why civil society not more vocal on the Google Tour<br>
against the EU<br>
>>>> decision to protect personal data, considering rightly in my<br>
>>>> view, that<br>
>>>> search engines are touching at personal data, beyond the<br>
simple links<br>
>>>> they assembled in their result pages? This is a real good<br>
debate for<br>
>>>> CS.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - why not to discuss the IETF and its roles in the IG? More<br>
important<br>
>>>> than IANA for example?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - why CS seems deprived of imagination and innovative ideas<br>
when it<br>
>>>> comes to create a new coordinating body/system, as the ICANN is<br>
>>>> saying<br>
>>>> the political aspects of IG is beyond its mandate? How can<br>
we help<br>
>>>> ourselves to have these ideas popping out of CS minds?<br>
Looking at all<br>
>>>> the NGOs we are currently ranking, I am positively<br>
impressed with<br>
>>>> their<br>
>>>> innovative abilities, much more powerful than classical<br>
corps. They<br>
>>>> also create more "values".<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I am not naive, and have probably a few answers in mind.<br>
>>>> Nevertheless,<br>
>>>> CS should really act differently. The NMI story is relevant<br>
of the<br>
>>>> weakness that anyone can perceive among CS, and this is not<br>
to blame<br>
>>>> JNC or anyone else. A leadership crisis wrote someone today.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Remember the preparation of Net Mundial? Did the ICANN<br>
handle CS in a<br>
>>>> satisfactory fashion? Haven't we seen the trailer? We had<br>
to twist<br>
>>>> their arm every minute to get info, to get principles, to<br>
simply<br>
>>>> get it<br>
>>>> not that bad. Why is it so difficult for the 'nice guys"<br>
not to go<br>
>>>> directly after the right ideas, proposals and suggestions when<br>
>>>> launching an open, honest, transparent debate? Instead they<br>
keep<br>
>>>> creating distrust with their committees, high level panel,<br>
advisory<br>
>>>> boards... Trust is critical. "Please energize me! should we all<br>
>>>> cry. We<br>
>>>> are all losing. Terrifying, I would say.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> So why don't you and other leaders of CS decide to meet, have a<br>
>>>> debate<br>
>>>> and launch a true CS initiative, calling governments,<br>
citizens and<br>
>>>> corporations to join in a effort to rebalance the growing<br>
>>>> asymmetry we<br>
>>>> live in since the mid-nineties? In the face of History, and our<br>
>>>> fellow<br>
>>>> citizens, we are failing, because CS is not united. To do<br>
that you do<br>
>>>> not need any WEF. You only need to trust, share, and<br>
confront the<br>
>>>> realities that are taking away our rights. This is what<br>
should be<br>
>>>> done,<br>
>>>> now, instead of wasting our time and little money to debate<br>
about the<br>
>>>> comfortable sofas of the WEF.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Somehow BB is a failure, as it has not delivered to its own<br>
mandate.<br>
>>>> JNC is not getting more isolated, it is growing and<br>
reaching more and<br>
>>>> more people. We should not care about that. We should care<br>
about<br>
>>>> having<br>
>>>> a collective action that would oblige governments, corps<br>
and the<br>
>>>> current mandarins to take more progressive steps.<br>
Multistakeholderism<br>
>>>> when it comes to convene and consult many participants is<br>
certainly<br>
>>>> nice. This has often been done, long before we began to put<br>
in our<br>
>>>> mouth the MS narrative. When it comes to make decisions at<br>
least<br>
>>>> on the<br>
>>>> public policy level, MS simply doesn't work. If the coders<br>
had to go<br>
>>>> through MS to make decision, they would have simply gone<br>
nowhere.<br>
>>>> Only<br>
>>>> a few guys fixing better than other few guys technical<br>
issues doesn't<br>
>>>> equate a political model. It could work, but then it would lead<br>
>>>> to some<br>
>>>> social disaster, a disruption that would unleash violence.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> JNC has no monopole of ethics, but because we are poor enough,<br>
>>>> our bias<br>
>>>> is somehow limited. We are paid by no government, no<br>
corporation, no<br>
>>>> barons. We are simple citizens, with a profound democratic<br>
>>>> concern (to<br>
>>>> avoid another asymmetric wars), and we are ready to go into<br>
>>>> rationales<br>
>>>> as long as we are not characterized as psychotics or lunatics.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> There is no way that we can really have a strong impact as<br>
civil<br>
>>>> society participants if we do not go after unity. And we all<br>
>>>> agree that<br>
>>>> we should pay more respect to each others, as long as we do<br>
not have<br>
>>>> hidden agenda, and gentle philanthropes putting their money<br>
in the<br>
>>>> debate. That would be fair.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> JC<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Le 18 nov. 2014 à 17:55, Jeremy Malcolm a écrit :<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> On Nov 18, 2014, at 1:49 AM, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The<br>
Global<br>
>>>> Journal <<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.<u></u>net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>><br></div></div>
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a><div><div class="h5"><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jc.nothias@theglobaljournal.net" target="_blank">jc.nothias@<u></u>theglobaljournal.net</a>>>> wrote:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I leave to Norbert co-convenor at JNC to answer your first<br>
email.<br>
>>>> On a<br>
>>>> personal note, I would appreciate you to elaborate about<br>
the "dumping<br>
>>>> on civil society colleagues" you are referring to,<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Within the next few days I’m going to write a separate blog<br>
post<br>
>>>> about<br>
>>>> this at <a href="http://igfwatch.org" target="_blank">igfwatch.org</a> <<a href="http://igfwatch.org" target="_blank">http://igfwatch.org</a>><br>
<<a href="http://igfwatch.org" target="_blank">http://igfwatch.org</a>>, because JNC’s<br>
>>>> pathologies are off-topic for this<br>
>>>> list.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> The WEF/ICANN/CGIbr project is not in lack of clarity. If I<br>
do listen<br>
>>>> to non JNC members:<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - Wall Street Journal reporter: "The NetMundial wants to spread<br>
>>>> Internet Governance more evenly across the developing world".<br>
>>>> (Ask Drew<br>
>>>> Fitzgerald about the source for that understanding of what<br>
is the WIB<br>
>>>> Initiative)<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Which is roughly opposite to what JNC is saying.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - McCarthy at The Register: "ISOC has blasted efforts from some<br>
>>>> quarters to create a "UN Security Council”<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> A fatuous analogy, do you take it at face value?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> - Eileen Donahoe, ... Virgilio Almeida, ... Richard Samans,<br>
... Fadi<br>
>>>> Chehadé: ...<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> None of these statements support the characterisation of the<br>
>>>> Initiative<br>
>>>> as in your letter as “being ’the’ mechanism for global<br>
[Internet]<br>
>>>> governance”.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Based on these official and public statement, I can only<br>
read JNC<br>
>>>> statement as an interesting analysis and agree with JNC<br>
reluctance to<br>
>>>> participate or endorse such following-up (hijacking might be to<br>
>>>> blunt)<br>
>>>> of the NetMundial meeting. Nor the WEF, ICANN, or CGIbr are<br>
owners of<br>
>>>> what was stated ultimately in Sao Paulo, with all due<br>
reserves by<br>
>>>> different participants.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I’ve also said, and maintain, that I regard the NETmundial<br>
Initiative<br>
>>>> (particularly the naming thereof) to be a hijacking of the<br>
NETmundial<br>
>>>> meeting. On this much we agree.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> So instead of trying to grab a comfortable seat in that<br>
convoy ...<br>
>>>> should for once, Civil Society ... acknowledges the serious<br>
concerns<br>
>>>> seen in the making of, and in the diverse objectives<br>
presented by the<br>
>>>> WEF, ICANN and CGIbr.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Ian has taking a more neutral position, but for my part<br>
personally I<br>
>>>> certainly have<br>
>>>><br>
(<a href="http://igfwatch.org/discussion-board/netmundial-initiative-takes-a-top-down-approach-to-implementing-the-netmundial-principles" target="_blank">http://igfwatch.org/<u></u>discussion-board/netmundial-<u></u>initiative-takes-a-top-down-<u></u>approach-to-implementing-the-<u></u>netmundial-principles</a>).<br>
>>>> What prompted my last email was not that JNC opposes the<br>
NETmundial<br>
>>>> Initiative, but that it has to do this by impugning the<br>
motives of<br>
>>>> other civil society groups and falsely attributing them<br>
with their<br>
>>>> endorsement of the Initiative.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Also for the avoidance of doubt, nobody else endorsed my rant<br>
>>>> which was<br>
>>>> sent in a personal capacity (though I have subsequently<br>
received, off<br>
>>>> list, two emails in support, as well as one against).<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> By the way, could you explain us (subscribers of the<br>
BestBits list):<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> I do not have time to respond to the rest of your mail<br>
right now<br>
>>>> because I am speaking at a conference today and will be<br>
boarding a<br>
>>>> flight a few hours later. But I write this brief response just<br>
>>>> because<br>
>>>> you suggested in most recent mail that I was ignoring you -<br>
I’m not.<br>
>>>> Anyway, others can respond to the balance of your questions<br>
>>>> rather than<br>
>>>> me monopolising the conversation.<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> --<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Jeremy Malcolm<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Senior Global Policy Analyst<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Electronic Frontier Foundation<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> <a href="https://eff.org" target="_blank">https://eff.org</a><br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org" target="_blank">jmalcolm@eff.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org" target="_blank">jmalcolm@eff.org</a>><br></div></div>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org" target="_blank">jmalcolm@eff.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org" target="_blank">jmalcolm@eff.org</a>>><span class=""><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::<br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>><br></span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>>>.<br>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>><br></span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>>>.<br>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> --<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> Dr. Anja Kovacs<br>
>>>> The Internet Democracy Project<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> <a href="tel:%2B91%209899028053" value="+919899028053" target="_blank">+91 9899028053</a> <tel:%2B91%209899028053><br>
<tel:%2B91%209899028053> | @anjakovacs<br>
>>>> <a href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in" target="_blank">www.internetdemocracy.in</a> <<a href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in" target="_blank">http://www.internetdemocracy.<u></u>in</a>><br>
<<a href="http://www.internetdemocracy.in" target="_blank">http://www.internetdemocracy.<u></u>in</a>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<u></u>You<br>
>>>> received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net.To" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net.To</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net.To" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net.To</a>><br></span>
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net.To" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net.To</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net.To" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net.To</a>>> unsubscribe or change<br>
>>>> your settings,<br>
>>>> visit: <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>> -- ``````````````````````````````<u></u>```anriette<br>
esterhuysenexecutive<br>
>>>> directorassociation for progressive communicationspo box 29755,<br>
>>>> melville, 2109, south <a href="mailto:africaanriette@apc.orgwww.apc.org" target="_blank">africaanriette@apc.orgwww.apc.<u></u>org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:africaanriette@apc.orgwww.apc.org" target="_blank">africaanriette@apc.<u></u>orgwww.apc.org</a>><br></span>
>>>> <mailto:<a href="mailto:africaanriette@apc.orgwww.apc.org" target="_blank">africaanriette@apc.<u></u>orgwww.apc.org</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:africaanriette@apc.orgwww.apc.org" target="_blank">africaanriette@apc.<u></u>orgwww.apc.org</a>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
>>>><br>
------------------------------<u></u>------------------------------<u></u>--------------------<br>
>>>> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>>>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>><br></span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>>>.<br>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
>>>> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> --<br>
>>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my<br>
brevity.<br>
>>><br>
>>> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.<u></u>igcaucus.org</a>><br></span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.<u></u>igcaucus.org</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org" target="_blank">governance@lists.<u></u>igcaucus.org</a>>><br>
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/<u></u>unsubscribing</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/<u></u>info/governance</a><br>
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
>>><br>
>>> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/<u></u>translate_t</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>><br></span>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a><span class=""><br>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>>>.<br>
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> --<br>
>> *Renata Avila *<br>
>> Global Campaign Lead, Web We Want <<a href="https://webwewant.org/" target="_blank">https://webwewant.org/</a>><br>
>> Human Rights - Intellectual Property Lawyer<br></span>
>> <a href="tel:%2B44%207477168593" value="+447477168593" target="_blank">+44 7477168593</a> <tel:%2B44%207477168593> (UK)<span class=""><br>
>><br>
>> *World Wide Web Foundation | 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500,<br>
Washington<br>
>> D.C. 20005 USA **| **<a href="http://www.webfoundation.org" target="_blank">www.webfoundation.org</a><br></span>
<<a href="http://www.webfoundation.org" target="_blank">http://www.webfoundation.org</a>><u></u>*<span class=""><br>
>> <<a href="http://www.webfoundation.org/" target="_blank">http://www.webfoundation.org/</a><u></u>>* | Twitter: @webfoundation*<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br></span><span class="">
>> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>>.<br>
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
>><br>
> ______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.<u></u>bestbits.net</a>>.<br>
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
> <a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br></span><span class="">
*Renata Avila *<br>
Global Campaign Lead, Web We Want <<a href="https://webwewant.org/" target="_blank">https://webwewant.org/</a>><br>
Human Rights - Intellectual Property Lawyer<br>
<a href="tel:%2B44%207477168593" value="+447477168593" target="_blank">+44 7477168593</a> (UK)<br>
<br>
*World Wide Web Foundation | 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington<br>
D.C. 20005 USA **| **<a href="http://www.webfoundation.org" target="_blank">www.webfoundation.org</a>*<br>
<<a href="http://www.webfoundation.org/" target="_blank">http://www.webfoundation.org/</a><u></u>>* | Twitter: @webfoundation*<br>
<br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>______________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net" target="_blank">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>.<br>
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits" target="_blank">http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/<u></u>info/bestbits</a><br>
<br>
</span></blockquote>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><font size="1"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><b>Renata Avila </b><br>Global Campaign Lead, <a href="https://webwewant.org/" target="_blank">Web We Want</a><span style="color:rgb(153,153,153)"></span></span></font><font size="1"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><br>Human Rights - Intellectual Property Lawyer</span></font></div><font size="1"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif">+44 7477168593 (UK)</span></font><br><span style="color:rgb(147,196,125)"><span style="background-color:rgb(255,255,255)"></span></span><br><div><div><font size="1"><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><b><span style="color:rgb(81,144,50)">World Wide Web Foundation | 1110 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 500, Washington D.C. 20005 USA </span></b></span><span style="font-family:verdana,sans-serif"><b><span style="color:rgb(81,144,50)">| </span></b><a href="http://www.webfoundation.org/" target="_blank"><b><span style="color:rgb(81,144,50);text-decoration:none">www.webfoundation.org</span></b></a><b><span style="color:rgb(81,144,50)"> | Twitter: @webfoundation</span></b></span></font><br></div></div></div></div>
</div>