<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">Hello all</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><FONT size=3>Sivasubramanian
wrote :</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><Inclusion of
"internationalization of Internet Governance" and "Digital Divide", including
the question "Should the interests of those who don’t yet have Internet access
be represented in the policy making processes and, if so, how?" are very
positive.></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">I find this far less
positive ! The EC is still wondering whether those excluded from the net should
be "represented" in the IG process ! Four years after Tunis and its Agenda and
Declaration assuming the inclusiveness of those people it's hardly to understand
... and even more to support such a position. </SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">Best</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">Jean-Louis
Fullsack</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN><SPAN
class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"></SPAN>----- Original Message
----- </DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=isolatedn@gmail.com href="mailto:isolatedn@gmail.com">Sivasubramanian
Muthusamy</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=governance@lists.cpsr.org
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</A> ; <A
title=jeanette@wzb.eu href="mailto:jeanette@wzb.eu">Jeanette Hofmann</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:25
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [governance] hearing on
Internet Governance arrangements in </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Hello Jeanette Hoffman,</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The themes for discussion states Security and Stability as a priority and
the theme description on Security and Stability is 'leading' ( like a
'leading' question that prompts a desired response). Security and Stability
are emphasized, but Privacy is nowhere in view. </DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>The theme description on "The Role of Public Authorities" is emphatic as
well. I couldn't miss the implication of the question "<SPAN
class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">should self-regulation for
critical infrastructures and services be more closely monitored by governments
and relevant public authorities?" And in the same passage hints at a possible
conclusion "private sector leadership and stronger governmental and public
policy making complementary and necessary"</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">The theme description on
Accountability and Legitimacy points out that "many Internet users do not
participate, even indirectly, in the governance processes" and in the context
of the emphasis on security, role of public authorities, private sector
leadership, I would take this as an inclination to belittle the users and
users' representative groups.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">Inclusion of
"internationalization of Internet Governance" and "Digital Divide", including
the question "Should the interests of those who don’t yet have Internet access
be represented in the policy making processes and, if so, how?" are very
positive.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">In the context of the
visible mood of the EU to legislate and legislate new rules and more rules on
Internet regulation, I am prone to be a little cautious about how the hearings
would go.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">Perhaps the caucus could
emphasize that the hearing should redefine its questions on User
participation, independent organizations as also include and
equally emphasize aspects such as Openness, Privacy and other core
civic values.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><BR></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse">Thank you.</SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=Apple-style-span
style="FONT-SIZE: 12px; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse"><BR></SPAN></DIV>Sivasubramanian
Muthusamy<BR><A
href="http://isocmadras.blogspot.com">http://isocmadras.blogspot.com</A><BR><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <SPAN
dir=ltr><jeanette@wzb.eu></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Hi,<BR><BR>the
European Commission hosts a hearing on Internet Governance in Brussels on
May 6. It is a by invitation only event. I got an invitation but cannot
attend. Yesterday I was told that we, the IGC, can send somebody else. Would
anybody be able and willing to go?<BR><BR>We are also invited to contribute
a written statement on any of the issues on the agenda. Since there is
probably not enough time to write and agree on a new statement, perhaps it
would make sense to contribute slightly amended version of one of our
statements for the IGF public consultations?<BR><BR>The website for the
meeting:<BR><A
href="http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/internet_gov/index_en.htm"
target=_blank>http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/internet_gov/index_en.htm</A><BR><BR><BR>I
post the agenda here because it seems to be missing on the
website:<BR><BR>Hearing on Internet Governance arrangements<BR>6 May 2009,
10:00 – 17:15<BR> Brussels – Charlemagne Building , Room
DURI<BR><BR><BR>09:30 Registration & coffee<BR>10:00 Introduction by the
Commission<BR>10.30 WSIS<BR>11.15 Security & stability<BR>12.00 The role
of governments<BR>12.45 Round up morning discussion<BR>13.00 Lunch<BR>14.15
Accountability and legitimacy<BR>15.00 Internationalisation of Internet
Governance<BR>15:45 Coffee break<BR>16:00 Digital divide<BR>16.45 Round up
afternoon discussion<BR>17:00 Concluding remarks<BR><BR>***<BR>Theme
description<BR>1. WSIS: Progress since WSIS- how far are
we with the implementation of WSIS principles? What are the new challenges,
if any, since WSIS that should be addressed?<BR>2.
Security & stability of the Internet remains a key EU priority.
What are the main threats/challenges? What should the EU be doing about them
in particular with a view to their international dimension?<BR>3.
The role of public authorities: How should public authorities,
in particular governments, respond to their responsibilities in view of the
importance of the Internet to our economies and societies? What lessons, if
any, should be learnt from the "financial crisis" (e.g. should
self-regulation for critical infrastructures and services be more closely
monitored by governments and relevant public authorities)? To what extent
are private sector leadership and stronger governmental and public policy
making complementary and necessary components for the effective management
of the Internet?<BR>4. Accountability and legitimacy: To
what extent are self-regulatory governance bodies accountable to Internet
users world-wide? What problems, if any, are posed by the fact that many
Internet users do not participate, even indirectly, in the governance
processes? Is it necessary to make governance fora more accountable to the
wider international community and, if so, how?<BR>5.
Internationalisation of Internet Governance: Is it desirable or
necessary to ensure fair participation of actors in their respective roles
from all geographic regions in the future shaping of the Internet and if so,
how? How can situations be avoided where the imposition of a particular
legal system or jurisdiction might disadvantage players from outside the
jurisdiction concerned?<BR>6. Digital divide: The future
billions of users will come largely from developing countries. Should the
existing Internet governance mechanisms be adapted to reflect this evolution
and, if so, how? Should the interests of those who don’t yet have Internet
access be represented in the policy making processes and, if so,
how?<BR><BR>jeanette<BR><BR>____________________________________________________________<BR>You
received this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR> <A
href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org"
target=_blank>governance@lists.cpsr.org</A><BR>To be removed from the list,
send any message to:<BR> <A
href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org"
target=_blank>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></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>____________________________________________________________<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>
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>