<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Ian Peter wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:C78B96D9.A5BF%25ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
type="cite">
<title>Re: [governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for Vilnius</title>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">I’d certainly like to see network neutrality/
open internet advanced as a theme, and seeing net neutrality can be so
confusing I’d like to see open Internet added after it.<br>
<br>
IGC co sponsored a very successful three hour workshop on this at Sharm
with Diplo. There are many issues, content neutrality probably sitting
highest in my mind. Its worthy of a main session as the current main
session themes we have repeated for some years are getting a little
tired. <br>
</span></font></blockquote>
In fact the stated workshop has done quite a good compilation of its
discussions, and as a co-sponsor of the workshop we should seek a full
main session on this theme. If US considers NN as the key Internet
policy issue right now, it could hardly be otherwise for the rest of
the world. I find it rather repugnant that we should wait for FCC of
US to pronounce its verdict on NN, and define it, and rest of us adopt
it by default. This is what i call as the dangerous new age
imperialism facilitated by the digital one-ness of the world, which is
controlled closely by some dominant actors - countries and companies,
and rest of us are supposes to sit back and 'enjoy' the immense
benefaction that is bestowed on us in from of new ICTs. <br>
<br>
On the main theme on development agenda, I think there have been enough
right noises last year that such a call may get accepted. There also
has been a 3 hour workshop on it last time. I think the whole idea of
what are the differential interests of developing countries in the new
socio-political digital landscape is perhaps the single most important
issue that needs to be worked on at present. So we should certainly
call for a 'development agenda in IG' main session. <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C78B96D9.A5BF%25ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
type="cite"><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
And yes we should continue to support the human rights and development
agendas. We need to find a way to overcome the block on rights
discussions which was evident last year – </span></font></blockquote>
While I myself suggested the 'Internet and human rights' agenda, there
is a certain complexity here. This is the year where states will vie -
the more active actors certainly will - to get some text written in the
decree for IGF renewal as per their interests and priorities. I do fear
that more we harp on human rights the chances are, and i merely
speculate here, and do invite comments, that some countries would
insist bringing in text like 'all issues like human rights, global
warming etc which have a clear home in the UN system for discussion
should be discussed at appropriate forums and IGF should only .......'.<br>
<br>
I do think that any such text will be very very difficult to get
through, and will be strongly resisted by US, EU etc, but what if it
becomes a bargaining chip for voting for renewal at all or not...
Again, speculation, but thought I would put my thoughts out for
consideration of IGC members. <br>
<br>
On the other hand, though with a nil chance of acceptance of a main
session on 'HR and the Internet', I do believe that all such CS
struggles are long haul, and every year at least chipping a bit is
needed, which could be a justification for us calling for such a main
session for IGF Vilnius.<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C78B96D9.A5BF%25ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
type="cite"><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">if anyone has suggestions on how we might
achieve this I would be interested.<br>
</span></font></blockquote>
I think the way to do it is to position positive rights vis a vis the
Internet right up there along with negative (formal) rights, and make
developing countries see that we really mean to look at all aspects,
really seriously. But I think for that, we have some way to go within
the CS itself, but that is the direction we should be aiming at. <br>
<br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C78B96D9.A5BF%25ian.peter@ianpeter.com"
type="cite"><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<hr align="center" size="3" width="95%"><b>From: </b>Jeremy Malcolm
<<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="jeremy@ciroap.org">jeremy@ciroap.org</a>><br>
<b>Reply-To: </b><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>>,
Jeremy Malcolm <<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="jeremy@ciroap.org">jeremy@ciroap.org</a>><br>
<b>Date: </b>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 16:40:27 +0800<br>
<b>To: </b><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for
Vilnius<br>
<br>
On 29/01/2010, at 6:47 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:<br>
<br>
</span></font>
<blockquote><font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;">So, let's get to work on such a statement
now. I don't think it needs to be very long, and indeed we could just
put forward some bullet points for Ginger to elaborate upon on the day.
So far we have on the table the following substantive themes:<br>
<br>
* Human rights<br>
* Development agenda<br>
* Network neutrality/Open Internet<br>
<br>
Comments, please, particularly on the last of these which Parminder has
just introduced?<br>
</span></font></blockquote>
<font face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
With just over a week to go there have still been no comments on this
thread so far, so I will try to summarise some of the arguments that
are usually made for and against this theme, as a way of kick-starting
discussion:<br>
<br>
FOR:<br>
<br>
Network neutrality (or "open Internet") emphasises the interest of
Internet users in being able, by default, to access content, services
and applications free from corporate or governmental interference
(though there are cases in which compelling interests may require
exceptions to this general principle). Network neutrality also stands
for the treatment of intermediaries (again, by default) as conduits for
information, rather than gatekeepers who bear liability for the content
they carry.<br>
<br>
AGAINST:<br>
<br>
Network neutrality is a confusing phrase with many different meanings
to different people. For example it is still wrongly thought of as
preventing individual network operators from managing their bandwidth,
which will only lead to misunderstandings in Vilnius (like the
arguments over whether "critical Internet resources" includes
electricity). On the other hand "Open Internet" doesn't seem to add
anything to the existing "Openness" theme, so why not just keep using
that existing theme instead? <br>
</span></font><font size="1"><font face="Helvetica, Verdana, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 9pt;">-- <br>
</span></font></font><font size="2"><font face="Arial"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><b>Jeremy Malcolm<br>
Project Coordinator<br>
</b></span></font></font><font face="Arial"><font color="#808080"><font
size="1"><span style="font-size: 9pt;">Consumers International<br>
Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East<br>
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia<br>
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599<br>
</span></font></font><font color="#cc9900"><font size="2"><span
style="font-size: 10pt;"><b>CI is 50<br>
</b></span></font></font><font color="#993366"><font size="1"><span
style="font-size: 9pt;">Consumers International marks 50 years of the
global consumer movement in 2010.<br>
Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect
consumer rights around the world. <br>
<u><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/50">http://www.consumersinternational.org/50</a></u></span></font></font><font
size="1"><span style="font-size: 9pt;"><u><font color="#0000ff"> <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/50">http://www.consumersinternational.org/50</a>>
<br>
</font></u></span></font><font size="2"><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br>
</span></font><font color="#999999"><font size="1"><span
style="font-size: 8pt;">Read our email confidentiality notice</span></font></font><font
size="1"><span style="font-size: 8pt;"><font color="#0000ff"> <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765">http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765</a>>
</font><font color="#999999">. Don't print this email unless
necessary.<br>
</font></span></font></font><font
face="Calibri, Verdana, Helvetica, Arial"><span
style="font-size: 11pt;"><br>
<br>
<hr align="center" size="3" width="95%"></span></font><font size="2"><font
face="Consolas, Courier New, Courier"><span style="font-size: 10pt;">____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a><br>
<br>
For all list information and functions, see:<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
</span></font></font>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>