<HTML><BODY style="word-wrap: break-word; -khtml-nbsp-mode: space; -khtml-line-break: after-white-space; ">Hi,<DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I am not totally comfortable with the paragraph. As I have pointed out often on this list and other is that I beleive we make a mistake when we accept the notion of Governments having sovereignty over ccTLD. Yes, I believe they need to be operated in the countries' interests, but do not beleive that should be automatically construed as translating to sovereignty.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>It is certainly their right to assert such a claim, but I see no reason for us to acquiesce to it, for in doing so, we help to make it so.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>I would prefer that we use language that indicates a county's responsibilities as steward of a ccTLd to protect human rights, privacy rights and equality of access.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV>a.</DIV><DIV><BR class="khtml-block-placeholder"></DIV><DIV><BR><DIV><DIV>On 3 dec 2005, at 10.14, Parminder wrote:</DIV><BR class="Apple-interchange-newline"><BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="State" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"> <O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="City" downloadurl="http://www.5iamas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"> <O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="place" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"> <O:SMARTTAGTYPE namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" name="country-region" downloadurl="http://www.5iantlavalamp.com/"> <DIV class="Section1"><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Bill, thanks for rounding up the outcomes from the discussions. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">One last point. I think, the ccTLD point is important and the global CS needs to take a position on how the enhanced role of governments recognized in the point 63 should be exercised. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">The words contributed by Wolfgang, and the additions provided by me almost constitutes clear language on this issue, and unless anyone on this list objects to it, I will request Ralf to consider its inclusion - exercising his judgment about its placement in the text on IG. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">I quote from Bill's mail below the discussions on this issue for others people's comments, if any. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">>>>Wolfgang raised a concern about the Tunis Agenda's para 63 on ccTLDs,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">stating, "We should say very clear, that the recognition of the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">sovereignty of countries / governments over their ccTD space is embedded<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">into a framework of general principles which includes all human rights,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">non-discrimination, equal access etc. " He did not suggest language. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">Parminder agreed, stating that national sovereignty over ccTLDs "should be<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">exercised in a manner that respects human rights as expressed in various<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">international treaties, and through a process that takes in diverse inputs<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">from the civil society at the national level." Personally, I would favor<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">expressing these concerns, but as nobody has suggested language or said<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">where it should go in the IG section. As time is running out, I doubt we'd<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">manage to reach a determination even if someone proposed text now, but if<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">someone wants to try, great. Otherwise, I guess it'll have to be your<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText" style="margin-left:.5in"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size:10.0pt">editorial judgment call as to the addition of a sentence or two on this.>>><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">parminder <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">________________________________________________<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Parminder Jeet Singh<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">IT for Change<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Bridging Development Realities and Technological Possibilities <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">91-80-26654134<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">www.ITforChange.net <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">-----Original Message-----<BR> From: governance-bounces@lists.cpsr.org [<A href="mailto:governance-bounces@lists.cpsr.org">mailto:governance-bounces@lists.cpsr.org</A>] On Behalf Of William Drake<BR> Sent: Saturday, December 03, 2005 3:20 PM<BR> To: <A href="mailto:bendrath@zedat.fu-berlin.de">bendrath@zedat.fu-berlin.de</A><BR> Cc: Governance<BR> Subject: [governance] Finalizing the IG Section of the CS Statement on <ST1:STATE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Tunis</ST1:PLACE></ST1:STATE></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Hi Ralf, (and all)<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">I guess time is running out to make changes to the IG section of the CS<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">statement. The last I heard you wanted to finalize Sunday afternoon and<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">were urging the caucus to urgently get it together on inputs. So, in<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">accordance with my instructions from Lee, let's see if we can track the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">debate and move toward closure for you.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">The last version of IG stuff I saw that you had incorporated into the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">draft statement was from Wednesday the 30th. It reflected suggestions I<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">made on the 28th and subsequent discussions and modifications by the group<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">in which multiple people weighed in and nobody said, no I can't accept<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">this. In the absence of other, more effective procedures it seemed<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">reasonable to treat that text as agreed. Since that time, to my knowledge<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">there have been a couple of additional suggestions that have been<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">variously (hi Avri;-) supported, so presumably the same 'nobody objected'<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">principle would apply. Some other points are still very much in the air.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">1. I suggested on Wed. 30th that IG be included in your first page<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">listing of CS objectives going into the <ST1:STATE w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Tunis</ST1:PLACE></ST1:STATE> phase, since affecting the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">IG process and decisions were in fact main objectives, certainly equal to<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the others listed, to which a lot of people devoted a lot of energy, with<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">some success. The language I suggested was:<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">"*Agreement on a substantively broad and procedurally inclusive approach to<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Internet governance, the reform of existing governance mechanisms in<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">accordance with the <ST1:CITY w:st="on"><ST1:PLACE w:st="on">Geneva</ST1:PLACE></ST1:CITY> principles, and the creation of a new mechanism<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">or forum to promote multistakeholder dialogue, analysis, trend monitoring,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and capacity building in the field of Internet governance."<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">According to the list archives, replies were received from Jeanette, Avri,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Vittorio, Adam, Izumi, Wolfgang, Jacky, Parminder, and Lee. Nobody<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">objected to this suggestion, although Jeanette expressed concern that<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">other caucuses might want to add additional objectives, which in my view<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">anyway is a separate matter and wouldn't be a function of one sentence on<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">IG. In any event, since the argument for including this is clear, the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">arguments against would be counterfactual, and a number of folks haven't<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">objected on its inclusion or substance, can we please treat this as<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">agreed? I think it would be utterly bizarre not to mention IG in key<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">objectives, and that other stakeholders and press would be perplexed.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">2. I also suggested a change on the IG piece for the going forward<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">section on page 10:<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">"Element two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">The CS Internet Governance Caucus will actively participate in and support<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the work of the IGF, and is exploring ways to enhance its working methods<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and engagement with relevant stakeholders, especially the research<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">community, to these ends. In addition, discussions are under way to<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">create a new working group that will make recommendations on the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">modalities of the IGF."<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Here things are more messy. The folks mentioned above didn't disagree<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">with the desirability of tweaking this passage or with the first sentence,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">but on the second pertaining to the WG concept, various ideas were<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">expressed without reaching a clear conclusion. Jeanette thought we should<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">not limit the WG sentence to modalities, and should hence just say that<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the caucus will "create a working group that will make recommendations on<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">relevant aspects concerning the IGF." Avri said she's fine with either<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">formulation. Vittorio said "we have to be very clear on whether we expect<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">this to be the only or at least the recommended place for CS groups that<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">want to discuss about the forum," but did not suggest language that would<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">bring this clarity. Jeanette replied, "Since we never speak for civil<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">society as such but only for a specific working group or caucus, I don't<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">understand what exactly it is you try to prevent or achieve." Adam said<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">"Of course other caucuses and working groups will be interested in the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">forum. And the Internet governance caucus may continue as is, it might<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">evolve into a new working group, or a new working group might emerge<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">separately. So why not refer to civil society and not mention the caucus<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">or any new working group?," but did not suggest text. Lee said "yay" for<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the original suggestion, Wolfgang said of course the WG is open to all and<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">should cover both modalities and substance, Izumi agreed it is open to<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">all, and Jacky asked whether "modalities and substance could be separated<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">into two groups?"<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">That is where we left it. It's not a clear picture on the WG sentence, but<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the first seems unproblematic. Here are two options Ralf, and in the event<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">you don't get more input, I guess you could just use your judgment?<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">A. "Element two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">The CS Internet Governance Caucus will actively participate in and support<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the work of the IGF, and is exploring ways to enhance its working methods<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and engagement with relevant stakeholders, especially the research<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">community, to these ends." Full stop. Don't say anything about a WG<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">since its form and function are not agreed yet, and any subsequent<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">decision to create one would not be inconsistent with the statement.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">B. "Element two: Involvement in the Internet Governance Forum<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">The CS Internet Governance Caucus will actively participate in and support<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the work of the IGF, and is exploring ways to enhance its working methods<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and engagement with relevant stakeholders, especially the research<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">community, to these ends. In addition, the caucus is considering the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">creation of a new working group that will make recommendations on the IGF,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and other civil society caucuses and working groups will develop ideas for<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and participate in the IGF as well." This second sentence would seem to<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">capture the various views expressed without committing us to any<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">particular configuration, more or less, or you could tweak, whatever.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">3. Izumi suggested that the first sentence of the section should read,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">"Civil society is pleased with the decision to create an Internet<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Governance Forum (IGF) for multistakeholder dialogue, which it has<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">advocated since 2003." The multistakeholder clause would be new. Nobody<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">has objected, the case it straightforward, hopefully you can insert this.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">4. Wolfgang raised a concern about the Tunis Agenda's para 63 on ccTLDs,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">stating, "We should say very clear, that the recognition of the<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">sovereignty of countries / governments over their ccTD space is embedded<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">into a framework of general principles which includes all human rights,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">non-discrimination, equal access etc. " He did not suggest language. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Parminder agreed, stating that national sovereignty over ccTLDs "should be<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">exercised in a manner that respects human rights as expressed in various<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">international treaties, and through a process that takes in diverse inputs<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">from the civil society at the national level." Personally, I would favor<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">expressing these concerns, but as nobody has suggested language or said<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">where it should go in the IG section. As time is running out, I doubt we'd<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">manage to reach a determination even if someone proposed text now, but if<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">someone wants to try, great. Otherwise, I guess it'll have to be your<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">editorial judgment call as to the addition of a sentence or two on this.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">5. A number of people have expressed various concerns about the wording<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">of the last paragraph on public education. While the general idea is easy<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">to support, there were some critical comments on the formulation too. <O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">There was not enough back and forth on language to see a resolution, and<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">the situation is complicated by the fact that Divina is not on the caucus<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">list. Here I would repeat my Dec. 1 suggestion which seems like a path of<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">least resistance, but do what seems right.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">> Lastly, in light of things said in the thread concerning the public<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">> awareness paragraph, I would suggest that this should be moved to the four<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">> para section on Education and Research, which I presume Divina played a<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">> role in shaping. Clustering like points and having thematic sections that<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">> come from people involved in the respective caucuses would in no way<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">> constitute a downgrading of this important concern.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Finally, on the global public goods thread, there's been some lengthy list<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">and private dialogue, strong views on both sides, no agreement, so<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">whatever.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Basta. Hope this helps you finalization process, and that some other<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">folks will weigh in on the above points in a manner that facilitates your<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">task. Thanks again for coordinating all this.<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Best,<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Bill<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">*******************************************************<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">William J. Drake <A href="mailto:wdrake@ictsd.ch">wdrake@ictsd.ch</A><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">President, Computer Professionals for<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"> Social Responsibility <A href="http://www.cpsr.org">www.cpsr.org</A><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"> <ST1:PLACE w:st="on"><ST1:CITY w:st="on">Geneva</ST1:CITY>, <ST1:COUNTRY-REGION w:st="on">Switzerland</ST1:COUNTRY-REGION></ST1:PLACE><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><A href="http://mitpress.mit.edu/IRGP-series">http://mitpress.mit.edu/IRGP-series</A><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><A href="http://www.cpsr.org/board/drake">http://www.cpsr.org/board/drake</A><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">Morality is the best of all devices for leading<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">mankind by the nose.---Nietzsche<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">*******************************************************<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><O:P> </O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">_______________________________________________<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt">governance mailing list<O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><A href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P><P class="MsoPlainText"><FONT size="2" face="Courier New"><SPAN style="font-size: 10.0pt"><A href="https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance">https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance</A><O:P></O:P></SPAN></FONT></P> </DIV> </O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE></O:SMARTTAGTYPE><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">_______________________________________________</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">governance mailing list</DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><A href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A></DIV><DIV style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><A href="https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance">https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance</A></DIV> </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></BODY></HTML>