<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:verdana,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div style="font-family: verdana,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt;">Thanks a million Robin for this link. Been there since hours now.<br>It is a great report, especially for those who could not be physically absent..<br><br>Was good to 'see' you all<br><br>Nnenna<br><div style="font-family: times new roman,new york,times,serif; font-size: 12pt;">----- Original Message ----<br>From: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org><br>To: a2k discuss list <a2k@lists.essential.org>; a2k-igf@ipjustice.org; Open Standards DCOS <Openstds@ipjustice.org>; expression@ipjustice.org; privacy-coalition@lists.apc.org; governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 2:08:39 AM<br>Subject: [governance] IP Justice Report on 2007 Internet Governance Forum (IGF)<br><br>
<br>Links to audio, video, photos on IGF 2007 ...<br><a href="http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/11/19/2007-igf-rio-wrap-up/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/wp/2007/11/19/2007-igf-rio-wrap-up/</a><br><br>apologies for cross-posting<br><br>------------------<br><br><br>IP Justice Report on 2007 Internet Governance Forum (IGF)<br><br>The 2007 Internet Governance Forum <<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/</a>> (IGF) <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/</a>> is officially over. The second meeting <br>hosted by the United Nations <<a href="http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/" target="_blank">http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/</a>> to advance <br>discussion on issues related to Internet governance was held in Rio de <br>Janeiro, Brazil from 12 – 15 November 2007.<br><br>The 4-day international conference focused on 5 main themes: Openness, <br>Access,
Security, Diversity, and issues related to the management of <br>Critical Internet Resources (CIR). Capacity building was a
cross-cutting <br>issue through all the main themes. Over 2,000 registered participants <br>from 109 countries attended the IGF’s various main plenary sessions, <br>workshops, best practice sessions and other related meetings.<br><br>Overall, the IGF-Rio was a success; it built upon the inaugural meeting
<br><<a href="http://intgovforum.org/IIGF_webcasts.htm" target="_blank">http://intgovforum.org/IIGF_webcasts.htm</a>> in Athens, Greece in October
<br>- November 2006, improving upon it in many ways, although back-sliding <br>in a few others.<br><br>This brief wrap-up of the 2007 IGF <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/campaigns/igf/igf-rio-2007/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/campaigns/igf/igf-rio-2007/</a>> is meant to serve as
<br>a means of improving the forum in preparation for the 2008 IGF in New <br>Delhi, India, which is scheduled for 8 – 11 December 2008. The first
of <br>three Open Consultations to organize IGF 2008 will be held in Geneva, <br>Switzerland from 25 – 27 February 2008.<br><br>Where 2007 IGF-Rio Excelled:<br><br>1. High quality of the workshops and best practice sessions<br><br>The best part of IGF 2007 was undoubtedly the various workshops <br><<a href="http://info.intgovforum.org/wsl3.php" target="_blank">http://info.intgovforum.org/wsl3.php</a>>, “dynamic coalition”
meetings, <br>and best practice sessions, which were independently organized by the <br>meeting’s participants. The level of quality of the dialogue in many
of <br>these sessions was outstanding, with diverse stakeholders coming <br>together to engage on a common topic and present different viewpoints. <br>All of the new ideas discussed at this year’s forum — indeed all <br>discussion of “emerging issues” — came from the independently
organized <br>workshops and best practice sessions. As IGF Chairman Nitin Desai put
it <br>during the 2007 closing session: like the Internet itself, all the real
<br>action at this forum was at the edges.<br><br>In addition to the robust quality of the non-main session discussions, <br>IGF-Rio offered an incredible number (84 <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Schedule_final.html" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Schedule_final.html</a>>) of meetings on a <br>broad range of subjects – indeed so many that participants had to
choose <br>between several interesting sessions that were scheduled concurrently. <br>But don’t fret: you can still watch or listen <br><<a href="http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/videos-archive.htm" target="_blank">http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/videos-archive.htm</a>> to all missed sessions
<br>for years to come via the Internet.<br><br>There were workshops that discussed open standards, the free expression
<br>concerns with ICANN deciding what ideas may be expressed in top level <br>domain names, overbroad intellectual property rights <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/03/a2kigf-rio-2007/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/03/a2kigf-rio-2007/</a>>, human rights issues
<br>in ICT policies, digital education <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/06/digital-education-workshop-at-the-2007-igf-rio/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/06/digital-education-workshop-at-the-2007-igf-rio/</a>>, <br>an international cyberlaw clinic <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/11/ip-justice-international-cyberlaw-clinic-to-be-showcased-at-igf-rio/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/11/ip-justice-international-cyberlaw-clinic-to-be-showcased-at-igf-rio/</a>>, <br>freedom of expression <<a href="http://foeonline.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">http://foeonline.wordpress.com/</a>>, an ‘Internet
<br>Bill of Rights’ <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/13/robin-gross-remarks-at-igf-2007-on-internet-bill-of-rights/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/13/robin-gross-remarks-at-igf-2007-on-internet-bill-of-rights/</a>>, <br>network neutrality issues and many, many more. (See the events IP <br>Justice was involved with at IGF-Rio here) <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/08/ip-justice-at-internet-governance-forum-2007-in-rio-de-janeiro/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/08/ip-justice-at-internet-governance-forum-2007-in-rio-de-janeiro/</a>>. <br><br><br>2. World-class technical capabilities and remote participation <br>opportunities<br><br>The Brazilian hosts <<a href="http://cgi.br/igf/" target="_blank">http://cgi.br/igf/</a>> and IGF Secretariat receive <br>high marks for their technical capabilities in organizing and managing <br>IGF 2007. Despite the large number of participants all
demanding online
<br>access at the same time, the Brazilians delivered — and even exceeded
<br>expectations in many cases. The technology simply worked.<br><br>All of the main sessions were webcast live so people around the world <br>could watch (and still can <br><<a href="http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/videos-archive.htm" target="_blank">http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/videos-archive.htm</a>>). And unlike most <br>online webcasts, these video streams were smooth, with virtually no <br>latency, like watching a TV program. The workshops and other sessions <br>were all audio cast live, recorded, and will be posted to the Internet <br>as MP3 files for download in the coming weeks.<br><br>Several language translations and live text transcriptions <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/</a>> of the sessions were available, making
the <br>discussions understandable for millions of more people. The remote <br>participation component of the meeting also allowed for those not in
Rio <br>to send moderators questions real-time via email or special chat <br>sessions set up specifically for this meeting.<br><br>This technical capacity was a marked improvement from last year’s
IGF, <br>setting a new gold standard for technical facilitation of international
<br>conferences.<br><br>3. Offline interactions and networking opportunities<br><br>One of the best aspects of IGF-Rio was the incredible networking <br>opportunities in the hallways, coffee shops, evening programs, and
other <br>informal IGF-related activities in and around the conference venue.<br><br>When thousands of people from all corners of the world with a common <br>interest in the Internet gather together the synergy can be electric. <br>New ideas were tossed around in these informal settings — without <br>moderators, presentations, or pre-prepared conclusions. Participants <br>were able to pick out key points made in the main sessions or
workshops, <br>and explore them more fully in small informal discussion circles. The <br>particular lay-out of the conference venue, where IGF participants
could <br>gather and further discuss issues without foot traffic from other hotel
<br>guests significantly contributed to the positive networking <br>opportunities at this year’s meeting.<br><br>The spontaneity of informal conversations and opportunities to meet new
<br>people in the hallways provided sufficient value to justify the trip to
<br>IGF-Rio — even if one is not an official speaker at the forum. And
the <br>networking opportunities in the conference hallways contributed to the <br>creation of several new IGF Dynamic Coalitions, such as the coalition
on <br>digital education <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/06/digital-education-workshop-at-the-2007-igf-rio/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2007/11/06/digital-education-workshop-at-the-2007-igf-rio/</a>> <br>and the coalition on gender issues <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/dynamic_coalitions.php?listy=12" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/dynamic_coalitions.php?listy=12</a>>.<br><br>Improvements for IGF 2008:<br><br><br>1. Human Rights and other controversial topics avoided in main sessions<br><br>Unfortunately not everything about IGF 2007 was a success. One
important <br>area where IGF 2006 was clearly superior to IGF 2007 was with respect
to <br>the discussion of controversial topics, such as online censorship or <br>other human rights.<br><br>Anyone at IGF 2006 will remember <br><<a href="http://ipjustice.org/2006/11/15/igf_athens_report/" target="_blank">http://ipjustice.org/2006/11/15/igf_athens_report/</a>> that countries
like <br>China and Iran, and companies like Cisco Systems and Yahoo! were taken <br>to task by the Internet community for their role in contributing to <br>Internet censorship. Unfortunately this year, critical discussion of <br>human rights concerns was discouraged, and main session organizers <br>walked on egg-shells to avoid offending China or businesses who assist <br>in the repression of Internet freedom and democracy. IGF participants <br>have repeatedly been warned that if they raise such critical concerns, <br>repressive governments and companies will pull-out of participation in <br>the forum – and we can’t have that!<br><br>The Chairman of the “Openness” session <br><<a href="http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/videos-archive.htm#2" target="_blank">http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/videos-archive.htm#2</a>>, Brazilian law <br>professor Ronaldo Lemos described <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Ronaldo-Lemos-Openness-IGF2007.MP3"
target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Ronaldo-Lemos-Openness-IGF2007.MP3</a>> <br>several aspects to “Openness” and he explained <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Ronaldo-Lemos-Open-Stds-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Ronaldo-Lemos-Open-Stds-IGF2007.MP3</a>>
the <br>developmental impact of Open Standards for Internet governance (note: <br>Susy Struble reported <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Susy-Struble-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Susy-Struble-IGF2007.MP3</a>> on the work
of <br>the Dynamic Coalition on Open Standards (DCOS) <br><<a href="http://www.igf-dcos.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igf-dcos.org/</a>> during another session).<br><br>While the main session on "Openness" <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Openness-14NOV07.txt" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Openness-14NOV07.txt</a>> <br>included significant discussion on the threat to free expression that <br>overbroad intellectual property rules create, those comments had to
come <br>from “discussants” such as Canadian cyberlaw Professor Michael
Geist <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Geist-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Geist-IGF2007.MP3</a>>, the audience, and <br>remote participants, since the main panelists lacked expertise on the <br>tension between freedom of expression and intellectual property from <br>civil society’s viewpoint. And although the topic of “access to <br>knowledge” is listed as a main topic for “Openness”, no experts
on that <br>issue were included on that panel.<br><br>Amnesty International’s representative on the “Openness” session,
Nick <br>Dearden, discussed <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Nick-Deardon_Amnesty-Intl-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Nick-Deardon_Amnesty-Intl-IGF2007.MP3</a>> <br>the importance of freedom of expression on the Internet and called on <br>the IGF <<a href="http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17520" target="_blank">http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17520</a>> to <br>elevate discussion on free expression at the forum. US Ambassador David
<br>Gross described <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/David_Gross_Openness.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/David_Gross_Openness.MP3</a>> why enabling <br>the free flow of information on the Internet should be one of the most <br>important Internet policy goals.<br><br>Unfortunately discussion about the privacy rights of Internet users was
<br>significantly down-graded in the main “Security” session <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Security-14NOV07.txt" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Security-14NOV07.txt</a>> this
<br>year (while those who spread fear of pornography have been elevated to
a <br>special status). Although Katitza Rodriguez <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Katitza-Privacy-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Katitza-Privacy-IGF2007.MP3</a>> and Ralf <br>Bandrath <<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Ralph-Bandrath-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Ralph-Bandrath-IGF2007.MP3</a>> <br>made valuable contributions on privacy during the session. Issues of <br>importance for the growing Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) <br>communities were marginalized, with only a single FOSS speaker, Georg <br>Greve <<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Georg_Greve-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Georg_Greve-IGF2007.MP3</a>>, on one <br>main session, “Security” to explain the need for transparency with <br>computer security.<br><br>Although human rights issues permeate through all of the forum’s main
<br>themes, human rights concerns were given short shrift in the
meeting’s <br>organization. For IGF to maintain any credibility as a forum responsive
<br>to concerns of Internet users and one working towards “an Internet
for <br>development”, it must include focused discussion on human rights, and
<br>specifically include the issue of human rights as a main theme for IGF <br>2008. Indeed the governments of Brazil and Italy issued a joint <br>statement <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/IGF/Nov2007-Joint-Declaration-Brazil-Italy.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/IGF/Nov2007-Joint-Declaration-Brazil-Italy.pdf</a>>during <br>the forum calling for human rights to a specific focus of IGF 2008.<br><br>Anriette Esterhuysen <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Anriette-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Anriette-IGF2007.MP3</a>>, Executive <br>Director of the Association of Progressive Communications noted during <br>the “Opening Ceremony” that that Internet is a public good and
should be <br>governed based on public interest principles including human rights, <br>free expression, open standards, privacy, balanced intellectual <br>property, interoperability, creativity, transparency, and
accountability.<br><br>During the May 2007 IGF Open Consultations <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/meeting.htm" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/meeting.htm</a>>, numerous civil society voices
<br>(and some governments like the Council of Europe) called for human <br>rights to be discussed as a cross-cutting theme at IGF-Rio; but China <br>vetoed that request during the consultations. Similarly, during <br>preparations for IGF 2006 in Athens, a repressive Central American <br>government vetoed the call for human rights to be fully addressed at
IGF <br>2006. The United Nations should not allow repressive governments to
veto <br>calls for human rights to be discussed more fully at IGF.<br><br>I noticed government and business representatives wearing "VIP" badges,
<br>but did not see any civil society leaders with "VIP" Badges. More must <br>be done to give civil society voices the same value as government and <br>business at the UN. The multi-stakeholder nature of IGF is viewed as
one <br>of its core features, giving it legitimacy where other fora have
failed. <br>But IGF risks slipping backwards to a forum where government and <br>business concerns are given precedence (even veto power!), while civil <br>society concerns are marginalized as insignificant or too
controversial.<br><br>Despite the alluring rhetoric of multi-stakeholderism at IGF, the <br>reality is that some stakeholders are more equal than others.<br><br>2. Glaring lack of gender balance and exclusion of young voices in main
<br>sessions<br><br>A disappointment in the meeting’s organization was the over-whelming <br>majority of speakers on main sessions who were men – much, much older
<br>men. For example, of the 7 speakers on the main “Openness” session,
not <br>a single woman was included as a main panelist, and only one woman (of <br>6) was given the lesser role of “discussant” during this session.
The <br>so-called “Emerging Issues” <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-EmergingIssues-15NOV07.txt" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-EmergingIssues-15NOV07.txt</a>> <br>session also did not include any female perspectives in the debate, and
<br>despite the session’s title, it did not include any speakers who <br>contribute to “new” thinking. Rather than the title of “Emerging <br>Issues”, this session could more accurately have been described as <br>“fading away”.<br><br>Anyone who works on Internet policy knows that women play a crucial
role <br>in advancing dialogue on these issues and numerous women in Rio would <br>have made excellent contributions to these discussions if allowed to <br>contribute. Government and business in particular made no apparent <br>effort to consider gender balance in the sessions. Nearly all of the <br>speakers representing government and business were men, leaving civil <br>society with an even heavier obligation to nominate women as main <br>session speakers in order to achieve some level of overall balance. <br>Business and government should be required to make nominate some female
<br>speakers for main session panels if they wish to participate in
meetings <br>held under the United Nations flag.<br><br>Despite the obvious innovation that has come from young people on the <br>Internet, it appears that main session organizers consider the <br>perspectives of people under the age of 55 to be irrelevant. It is <br>undisputable that the creators of the Internet’s most revolutionary <br>tools such as search engines like Google, or Peer-to-Peer (P2P) <br>file-sharing programs, or online communities such as YouTube, Facebook,
<br>and Second Life come from young innovators and are often geared toward <br>young people. Sadly one speaker (Andrew Keen) on the “Emerging
Issues” <br>session openly dismissed the concerns of youth as not worth listening <br>to. But it would have been a breath of fresh air to hear from the <br>leaders of tomorrow at this forum.<br><br>The lack of funding to bring women and voices of youth (and
participants <br>from developing countries) to IGF is a major contributing factor to the
<br>problem of gender and age imbalance in the forum. As long as there <br>continues to be no funding to bring women, youth, and developing
country <br>panelists to IGF, the speaker lists will continue to be dominated by <br>older men from developed countries, who are sent to IGF by large <br>companies and governments to advocate for their own corporate or <br>national agendas.<br><br>3. Main sessions dominated by established players<br><br>In stark contrast to the robust dialogue in workshops and other
non-main <br>sessions, the IGF-Rio main session discussions was largely
insignificant <br>in substance. More must be done to include a diversity of viewpoints, <br>instead of the same speakers and the same perspectives on all the main <br>panels.<br><br>Main session speakers tended to be the same voices we heard at last <br>year’s main sessions. A number of speakers were panelists on several <br>main sessions this year, but there are many qualified experts who hold
a <br>wide range of views and expertise on ICT policy issues.<br><br>The main session on “Critical Internet Resources” <br><<a href="http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Critical%20Internet%20Resources-12NOV07.txt" target="_blank">http://www.intgovforum.org/Rio_Meeting/IGF2-Critical%20Internet%20Resources-12NOV07.txt</a>> <br>(CIR), the most controversial topic for many IGF participants, <br>unfortunately resulted in a missed opportunity. Only one panelist on <br>that session, Professor Milton Mueller openly confronted the problems <br>with the current management structure of the Internet. Professor
Mueller <br>made several interventions on the meaning on Critical Internet
Resources <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-Global-Governance.mp3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-Global-Governance.mp3</a>>, on the <br>role of governments at ICANN <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-GAC2.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-GAC2.MP3</a>>, the dominance of the
<br>United States Government at ICANN <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-GAC.mp3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-GAC.mp3</a>>, the future of ICANN <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-Future-ICANN.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-Future-ICANN.MP3</a>>, and the <br>future of global governance <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-Future-Global-Governance.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Mueller-Future-Global-Governance.MP3</a>>.<br><br>The other note-worthy intervention <br><<a href="http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Carlos-Afonso-IGF2007.MP3" target="_blank">http://www.ipjustice.org/Audio/Carlos-Afonso-IGF2007.MP3</a>> during the <br>CIR session came from Carlos Afonso of <a target="_blank" href="http://cgi.br">cgi.br</a> who provided a possible <br>framework for redistributing ICANN’s functions among several
linked <br>entities with his /“Jack the Ripper”/ proposal. So while it was a
step <br>forward to even permit the controversial CIR topic on the agenda
(unlike <br>IGF 2006), the dominance of established players and current management <br>insiders resulted in a controlled discussion which barely touched upon <br>the concerns of those seeking improvement in the Internet’s
management.<br><br>Another example: 4 people who have served as ICANN board members and 2 <br>representatives from the same company (Cisco Systems) spoke on the <br>“Emerging Issues” main session. Nearly every speaker on that
session was <br>also a main session speaker at last year’s IGF … yawn … another
missed <br>opportunity. The list of examples could go on, but I think you get the <br>point.<br><br>We will do better in Delhi.<br><br>____________________________________________________________<br>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br> <a ymailto="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br> <a ymailto="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org" href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br><br>For all list information and functions, see:<br> <a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br></div><br></div></div><br>
<hr size=1>Be a better pen pal.
Text or chat with friends inside Yahoo! Mail. <a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51732/*http://overview.mail.yahoo.com/">See how.</a></body></html>