<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Re: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>Since I’m sitting next to Robin at the A2K3 conference I guess I should second her statement.<BR>
<BR>
Bill<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 9/8/08 4:07 PM, "Robin Gross" <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>I haven't been able to keep up on this discussion as I would have liked to, but I wanted to weigh in (hopefully not too late and off topic).<BR>
<BR>
I also have deep concerns about promoting "collective" rights because I see them as subordinating individual rights in potentially dangerous ways (although no harm is intended). It is the sovereign individual that is ultimately responsible. Individuals acting together can be collectives, but it always breaks down to the individual in the end.<BR>
<BR>
Robin<BR>
<BR>
On Sep 5, 2008, at 6:43 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote:<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="100%"> </SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><FONT FACE="Tahoma"><B>From:</B> Parminder [<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net]">mailto:parminder@itforchange.net]</a> <BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"> <BR>
<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT FACE="Arial"><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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. </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Agreed. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#000080"> <BR>
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><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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. </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>I did not delete that language, in regard to RTDevelopment, I think it is perfectly acceptable to "explore" contested issues. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#000080"> <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. 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><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080"> <BR>
<BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<FONT COLOR="#0000FF">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.<BR>
</FONT></SPAN><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>“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="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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. </SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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." That makes it clear that there is disagreement. which there is.<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#000080"> <BR>
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><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#000080">I also have problem with the new opening para that you propose.<BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT FACE="Times New Roman"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:16.0px'>“The Tunis Agenda (para. 42) </SPAN></FONT><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>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>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'> <BR>
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></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>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. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#000080"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'> including concerns of what I call as the vast majority of people, which go beyond these two rights. </SPAN></FONT></FONT><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"> <BR>
</FONT></SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT COLOR="#0000FF"><FONT SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:13.0px'>Just for the record, I do not accept your claim to speak for the vast majority of people. <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'> <BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'>____________________________________________________________<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">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<BR>
</SPAN><FONT SIZE="1"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:12.0px'><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
IP JUSTICE<BR>
Robin Gross, Executive Director<BR>
1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA<BR>
p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451<BR>
w: <a href="http://www.ipjustice.org">http://www.ipjustice.org</a> e: robin@ipjustice.org<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=CENTER SIZE="3" WIDTH="95%">____________________________________________________________<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">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><BR>
</SPAN></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE><FONT FACE="Arial"><SPAN STYLE='font-size:18.0px'><BR>
<BR>
***********************************************************<BR>
William J. Drake <BR>
Director, Project on the Information<BR>
Revolution and Global Governance<BR>
Center for International Governance<BR>
Graduate Institute of International and<BR>
Development Studies<BR>
Geneva, Switzerland<BR>
william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch<BR>
***********************************************************<BR>
<BR>
</SPAN></FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>