<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:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{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=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Karen<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=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>>in terms of defining rights.. just to remind (and apologies if i
sound like a broken record) that several groups now have attempted to do this
including APC, the >BOR coalition, global partners, UNESCO, the work of the
WSIS CS Human Rights caucus and the CRIS campaign<br>
<br>
>so let's build on the collective work done this past 10 years or so.<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=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>The original draft proposed by me
(enclosed) had a footnote ‘To quote some existing initiatives here’.
It got lost in subsequent edits. Yes, I agree these initiatives should be
listed. It the list you provide fine? <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>
<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'> karen banks
[mailto:karenb@gn.apc.org] <br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Friday, September 05, 2008
7:24 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> governance@lists.cpsr.org; Milton
L Mueller; governance@lists.cpsr.org; Parminder<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Cc:</span></b> lisa Horner<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'>hi milton, all<br>
<br>
in terms of defining rights.. just to remind (and apologies if i sound like a
broken record) that several groups now have attempted to do this including APC,
the BOR coalition, global partners, UNESCO, the work of the WSIS CS Human
Rights caucus and the CRIS campaign<br>
<br>
so let's build on the collective work done this past 10 years or so<br>
<br>
if i recall correctly (lisa - please correct me if i'm wrong) - global partners
put together a document that mapped such documents.. it might be useful to
refer to that (and update if necessary) in this work<br>
<br>
i think we have a good chance of influencing the cairo agenda if we build this
work carefully and inclusively (not to suggest we aren't already) over the next
6-12 months<br>
<br>
karen<br>
<br>
At 19:51 04/09/2008, Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Content-class: urn:content-classes:message<br>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;<br>
<x-tab> </x-tab>
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C90EBF.4EBACFA5"<br>
<br>
<br>
</span></font><font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;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. <br>
</span></font> <br>
<font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:blue'>Substantively,
I tried to do two things: <br>
</span></font> <br>
<font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;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. <br>
</span></font> <br>
<font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;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. <br>
</span></font> <br>
<font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:blue'>For those not
on the Google docs list I append the statement below<br>
</span></font><br>
<font size=2><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>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> <br>
</span></font> <br>
<font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:blue'><br>
</span></font><i><font size=2><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-style:italic'>IGC’s
input -1 to the synthesis paper for IGF, <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Hyderabad.<br>
</span></font></i><font size=2 color=blue><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
color:blue'><br>
</span></font><font size=2><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>‘<b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>Rights and the Internet’ as the over-arching
theme for IGF-4 in Egypt <br>
</span></b><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font>The Tunis Agenda (para. 42) 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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font>The Internet Governance Caucus strongly recommends that
‘Rights and the Internet’ be made the overarching theme for IGF-4
in Egypt, 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 Egypt. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font><b><i><span style='font-weight:bold;font-style:italic'>A complex
new emerging ecology of rights and the internet<br>
</span></i></b><font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font> 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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font><br>
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.<br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font>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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font>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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font><a name=sdfootnote3anc></a>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 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.<br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font>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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
<br>
<br>
</span></font>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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
<br>
<br>
</span></font>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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font><br>
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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font> 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. <br>
<font color=blue><span style='color:blue'><br>
</span></font> <br>
</span></font>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit<br>
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="message-footer.txt"<br>
<br>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
governance@lists.cpsr.org<br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org<br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance"
eudora=autourl>http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>