<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word"><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3395" name=GENERATOR><!--[if !mso]>
<STYLE>v\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
o\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
w\:* {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
.shape {
BEHAVIOR: url(#default#VML)
}
</STYLE>
<![endif]-->
<STYLE>@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: purple; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
P.MsoPlainText {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"
}
LI.MsoPlainText {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"
}
DIV.MsoPlainText {
FONT-SIZE: 10pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Courier New"
}
P {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
P.western {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
LI.western {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
DIV.western {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
P.sdfootnote-western {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
LI.sdfootnote-western {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
DIV.sdfootnote-western {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 0in; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0in; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto
}
SPAN.EmailStyle21 {
COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; mso-style-type: personal-reply
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
</STYLE>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US vLink=purple link=blue><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Parminder
[mailto:parminder@itforchange.net] <BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Thanks Milton for
this engagement. While, as you would expect, I have a lot of issues with your
amendments, this process of engagement and deliberation is very
useful. <FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008>Agreed. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">It is important to
recognize that there are two important and different contestations here. One,
whether there is at all a category of positive and collective rights in any
case whatsoever. My personal view is that it is a very small minority among
the IGC membership that really contests the very validity of the category of
positive and collective rights. I invite members’ comments on this statement.
Accordingly, I don’t think an IGC statement should go out casting doubts on
the very validity of these categories of rights. I would therefore want all
corresponding parts of the statement removed.<FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=324082713-05092008>But there is no doubt about the
fact that it is contested. And it is not just me, three or four others have
taken up this discussion more or less from my point of view. Based on the list
dialogue this would look like almost a 50-50 division, but whether this is a
"small minority" or a significant minority doesn't matter, it is contested,
and if the statement doesn't reflect that I will opt out of it and issue a
separate statement contesting the legitimacy of your statement as an
expression of IGC. </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The second
contestation is about whether there are some already accepted extensions of
positive and collective rights to the Internet – right to access internet
(positive right) and right to cultural expression or an Internet in ones own
language (a collective right). I agree that there may not be enough consensus
in this group at present to assert these rights, and we may only speak of
exploring them, and debating the pros and cons. Accordingly, I am for
mentioning the language of ‘wanting to explore’ with regard to these
rights. <FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=324082713-05092008>I did not delete that
language, in regard to RTDevelopment, I think it is perfectly acceptable
to "explore" contested issues.
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P><FONT
color=navy><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">
<P class=MsoNormal>“The openness and diversity of the internet are underpinned
by widely recognized (but still imperfectly enforced) basic human rights: the
individual right to freedom of expression and to privacy. It may also be
useful to explore if and whether positive and collective rights are meaningful
in relation to the Internet – for instance a right to Internet access, or a
right of cultural expression - including the right to have an Internet in ones
own language, which can inform the important IGF thematic area of
cultural diversity.”<FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN class=324082713-05092008><FONT
face=Arial size=2>This proposed amendment does not make it clear
that there are significant participants in CS who contest the positive
and collectivist notions, so I can't accept
it.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=black size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black">“We recognize that while it is
relatively easy to articulate and claim “rights” it is much more difficult to
implement and enforce them. We also recognize that rights claims can sometimes
conflict or compete with each other. For example, a claim that there is a
“right to Internet access” may imply an obligation on states to fund and
provide such access, but it is likely that if states are responsible for
supplying internet access that there will also be strong pressures on them to
exert controls over what content users can access using public funds and
facilities. There can also be uncertainty about the proper application
of a rights claim to a factual situation. The change in the technical methods
of communication often undermines pre-existing understandings of how to apply
legal categories. “</SPAN></FONT><FONT color=blue><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face="Times New Roman" color=blue size=3><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: blue"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">This para clearly
makes out a strong case against ‘right to the Internet’ and is obviously not
acceptable to those who speak for it. I would delete the whole
para. <FONT color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=324082713-05092008>So people who believe in a
positive right to Internet access cannot be contradicted, but those who do not
can be? I think the only thing you need to do is replace "it is likely that if
states are responsible" with "some fear that if states are
responsible." </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=324082713-05092008> That makes it clear that
there is disagreement. which there
is.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I however find the
last two sentences – which I know you state in terms of meaningfulness of
universal access – very interesting in terms of IPR in digital space. But I
discuss my issues with the IPR paragraph in a separate email.<FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><FONT
color=#0000ff><SPAN class=324082713-05092008>The last two sentences were meant
to be general, not specific to universal access or IPRs -- the principle
applies to all kinds of issues, especially privacy and identity.
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></FONT></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I also have problem
with the new opening para that you propose.<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=western style="MARGIN-BOTTOM: 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman"
color=black size=3><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: black">“The Tunis
Agenda (para. 42) </SPAN></FONT><FONT color=black><SPAN lang=EN-GB
style="COLOR: black">invoked human rights when it reaffirmed a global
"commitment to the freedom to seek, receive, impart and use information" and
affirmed that "measures undertaken to ensure Internet stability and security,
to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, must protect and respect the
provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as contained in the relevant
parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Geneva Declaration
of Principles." However, little follow up work has been done to enact these
commitments to basic human rights in Internet
governance.”<o:p></o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT face=Arial color=navy size=2><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><o:p> </o:p></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">If one mentions
rights in the IG arena it is by default read as FoE and privacy rights. While
these are basic and very important rights, our effort is to explore the rights
terrain much further. As argued in my earlier email the possibility that a
broad rights agenda may at ant time be globally accepted as a good basis for
IG related policy discussions also lies in making the rights discourse
broader, <SPAN class=324082713-05092008><FONT
color=#0000ff> </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008><FONT color=#0000ff>This is a tactical difference
mainly, but also one of principle. You start with the area where there is the
most common ground. The point about citing the Tunis Agenda is that
governments have already committed themselves to it, I think the line about
balancing security concerns with other rights is especially important. Even on
your own expansive terms, it would be wiser to start with the traditional
rights and then move gradually into how far it can be taken.
</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008> </SPAN>including concerns of what I call as the
vast majority of people, which go beyond these two rights. <SPAN
class=324082713-05092008><FONT
color=#0000ff> </FONT></SPAN></SPAN></FONT></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008><FONT color=#0000ff>Just for the record, I do not
accept your claim to speak for the vast majority of people.
</FONT></SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><FONT color=navy><SPAN
style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial"><SPAN
class=324082713-05092008></SPAN></SPAN></FONT> </P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>