<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[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 Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.western, li.western, div.western
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.sdfootnote-western, li.sdfootnote-western, div.sdfootnote-western
{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
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 link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Milton<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Some more stuff on your amendments. This
has to do with your changes to the part on IPR.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>In discussing ‘right to access the
Internet’, you mention the following. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>“</span></font><font color=black><span
style='color:black'>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. “<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I will like to use this formulation in my
arguments regarding IPR. I did ask you in an earlier email about how you
consider property rights as real rights in the sense of being negative rights,
in the complicated property systems that we have today (email enclosed). I enquired
further how especially IPR, and even more so IPR in digital space, could be
considered a negative right. In fact right to access knowledge (positioned against
IPR in WIPO discussions) looks more of a negative right, and IPR a positive right.
When I use an idea I can no way interfere with any other person’s right
to use it – though I may interfere with his state-aided scheme to make
money out of it, which may be a socio-economic device to promote innovation etc,
but I cant see it as a right, as rights go, especially in your restrictive
definition.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>So, apart from the fact that you never
answered whether you do not consider right to education as a real right, I
would also like to know how you consider IPR as a real negative right. I
especially ask because first McTim removed the text on – are IPR real rights?
Which was only an exploratory question, given that a lot of civil society really
doesn’t consider IPR as a real right. And now in your present set of
amendments you have tried to make sure that there is no implication that IPR as
a category of rights itself may be contested, changing the earlier text <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>“While the ‘right to property’ has conventionally
been considered of considerable importance, its applicability and mutations in
the the digital environment, particularly in the form of Intellectual Property
rights, is current being widely contested.”<font color=black><span
style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></font></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>to<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>“While property rights are of
considerable importance, their applicability and mutations in the the digital
environment have led to widespread political contention over the proper scope
of copyrights, trademarks and patents.”<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Your sensitivity to any implications that
IPR themselves may be problematic as rights, when in fact it is difficult to
think of them as negative rights, while putting in statement of doubts whether positive
and collective rights are even legitimate categories is interesting, and does
show that our views comes more from respective political economy thinking rather
than essentialist notions of what may be rights and what not. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>In the original text there was another question
- Are corporate entities entitled to rights as we understand the</span></font>
term? <font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I think McTim removed it. What do you think of it?
For someone so adamant that rights can cohere only in individuals, such rights belonging
not just to collectives - who still are individuals, even if a bunch of
them – but to an abstract limited liability entity should be anathema.
Why would you not oppose IPRs, especially Corporate IPRs from the same
essentialist position that you oppose positive and collective rights? <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I think there is a lack of mutual understanding
and appreciation of what we respectively mean by rights, and that over some deliberations
it is possible for us to agree to a good extent. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Parminder <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<div style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt'>
<div>
<div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>
<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabindex=-1>
</span></font></div>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font size=2
face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> Milton L Mueller
[mailto:mueller@syr.edu] <br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Friday, September 05, 2008
12:22 AM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> governance@lists.cpsr.org;
Parminder<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> RE: [governance] Inputs
for synthesis paper</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>OK, I just made some extensive edits to
the rights statement. A lot of the small stuff was editorial, there was
redundancy and awkwardness in many sentences, perhaps reflecting the
fragmentary approach of a shared doc. I hope people agree on the stylistic
improvements. </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Substantively, I tried to do two things: </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>First, make it clearer that the definition
and application of rights talk is contested and complicated -- and use that to
bolster the argument that that makes it a good focus for IGF Egypt. In line
with this, I added a quotation from the Tunis Agenda at the beginning. </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Second, group and expand certain
discussions to run in a more coherent and structured manner. For example, there
were scattered references to privacy which I tried to consolidate in a single
para. and expand a bit. </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>For those not on the Google docs list I
append the statement below</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<p><font size=2 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><!-- Converted from text/plain format -->Milton
Mueller<br>
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies<br>
XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology<br>
------------------------------<br>
Internet Governance Project:<br>
<a href="http://internetgovernance.org">http://internetgovernance.org</a></span></font><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><i><font
size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:black;font-style:italic'>IGC’s input -1 to the synthesis paper for
IGF, <u1:City w:st="on"><u1:place w:st="on">Hyderabad</u1:place></u1:City>.</span></font></i><font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>‘</span></font><b><font
size=4 color=black><span style='font-size:13.5pt;color:black;font-weight:bold'>Rights
and the Internet’ as the over-arching theme for IGF-4 in <u1:country-region w:st="on"><u1:place w:st="on">Egypt</u1:place></u1:country-region>
</span></font></b><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;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. </span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>The
Internet Governance Caucus strongly recommends that ‘Rights and the
Internet’ be made the overarching theme for IGF-4 in <u1:country-region w:st="on"><u1:place w:st="on">Egypt</u1:place></u1:country-region>,
and that the IGF-4’s program be framed by the goal of developing a
rights-based discourse in the area of Internet Governance. The Caucus has
already expressed support for the letter on this subject which was sent to the
MAG by the Dynamic Coalition on an Internet Bill of Rights. The IGC offers the
IGF assistance in helping to shape such a discourse at the IGF meetings, and
specifically to help make ‘Rights and the Internet’ an overarching
theme for IGF-4 in <u1:country-region w:st="on"><u1:place w:st="on">Egypt</u1:place></u1:country-region>. </span></font><font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><b><i><font
size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:black;font-weight:bold;font-style:italic'>A complex new emerging ecology
of rights and the internet</span></font></i></b><font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>One
important purpose of a discourse on rights should be to clarify and reach
greater consensus on how Internet rights are defined, how they relate to
pre-existing definitions of human rights, and which ones need to be
internationally recognized and strengthened. There are currently basic
philosophical differences, even among civil society actors, over what
constitutes a right and whether human rights inhere only in individuals or can
also be assigned to collectivities. </span></font><font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><br>
<br>
</span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>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. To some, conceptions of rights and the
internet may also extend to the area of positive and collective rights –
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. Others contest
these positive and collective claims, viewing them as worthy policy goals but
not as rights.</span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Many
important internet policy areas, like network neutrality, are being framed in
terms of rights, such as a right to access and share information, or as an
extension of freedom of expression itself. The right of the public to access
government-produced information presents itself in a wholly new manner in a
digital environment, where information is often publicly sharable at little or
no extra cost. Positive acts of withholding digital public information from
citizens in fact can be looked upon as a form of censorship. All of these
rights-based conceptions may be included in the IGF openness theme area. Other
rights such as the right of association and the right to political
participation may have important new implications in the internet age,
including the right to participate in the shaping of globally applicable
internet policies. </span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>While
the internet opens unprecedented economic, social and political
opportunities in many areas, many fear that it may at the same time be further
widening economic, social and political divides. It is for this reason that
development has been a central theme for the IGF meetings to date. In this
new, more global and digital context it might be useful to explore what the
term "right to development" means. </span></font><font color=blue><span
style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>With
respect to privacy rights, corporations and governments are increasingly able
to extend digital tentacles into people’s homes and personal devices, in
manners invisible to consumers and citizens.Consumers of digital products thus
face new challenges including the right </span></font><a
name=sdfootnote3anc></a><a
href="http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=false&revision=_latest×tamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfootnote3sym"></a><font
color=black><span style='color:black'>to know and completely ‘own’
the products and services they pay for. Technological measures to monitor and
control user behavior on the internet is becoming increasingly sophisticated,
and often outrun public policies and traditional concepts of what rights users
have.</span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>While
property rights are of considerable importance, their applicability and
mutations in the the digital environment have led to widespread political
contention over the proper scope of copyrights, trademarks and patents. In
fact, intellectual property is emerging as a primary area of socio-economic
conflict in the information society. The IGF can explore issues
surrounding the public interest principles which underpin IPR alongside the
concept of a right to access knowledge in the digital space. It can also
explore how individuals' property right to own, build, test, and use consumer
electronics, computers and other forms of equipment can be reconciled with the
regulation of technical circumvention to protect copyrights. </span></font><font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;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 style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><font
size=3 color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:blue'> <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto;mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto'><font
size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
color:black'>These complexities, however, only strengthen the case for using
the IGF to explicitly discuss and debate these problems. There is no other
global forum where such issues can be raised and explored in a non-binding
context. </span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 color=black face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'><br>
<br>
</span></font><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>Internet
governance has up to this time largely been founded in technical principles
and, increasingly, on the internet’s functionality as a giant global
marketplace. With the internet becoming increasingly central to many
social and political institutions, an alternative foundation and conceptual
framework for IG can be explored. It is the view of the IG Caucus that a
right-based framework will be may be appropriate for this purpose. </span></font><font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=black face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:black'>It
is the Caucus’ view that the IGF is the forum best suited to take up
this task. This process should start at the IGF Hyderabad, where workshops on
rights issues are being planned. These issues will also hopefully figure
prominently in the main sessions. The IGC fully expects that these discussions
will help the IGF work towards developing ‘Rights and the Internet’
as the over-arching theme of the IGF-4 in Egypt. </span></font><font
color=blue><span style='color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=western style='margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><font size=3
color=blue face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;color:blue'><o:p> </o:p></span><u1:country-region w:st="on"><u1:place w:st="on"></u1:place></u1:country-region></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>