<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 9.00.8112.16441"></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN class=728181022-10032012><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial>I think from a civil society perspective the "formal" use of the
terminology of a "global public interest" is enormously important and
defining, operationalizing, and "owning" this terminology should be the
primary focus of civil society involvement in the IGF going
forward. </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=728181022-10032012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=728181022-10032012>M</SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT color=#0000ff size=2 face=Arial><SPAN
class=728181022-10032012></SPAN></FONT></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr lang=en-us class=OutlookMessageHeader align=left><FONT
face=Tahoma><FONT size=2><SPAN
class=728181022-10032012> </SPAN>-----Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Matthias C.
Kettemann<BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 10, 2012 2:01 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
governance@lists.igcaucus.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [governance] NTIA says
ICANN "does not meet the requirements" for IANA
renewal<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>I have done a bit of thinking and writing
about what the NTIA decision tells us about Internet Governance and the
multi-stakeholder approach. <BR><BR>In brief: Is the NTIA decision a good
thing for multistakeholderbased human rights-sensitive Internet
Governance?<SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"
lang=EN-US> <BR><BR>It is, if it leads to more accountability in the next
application of ICANN, which is sure to follow.</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Arial, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" lang=EN-US><BR>It
isn't, if it leads to more governmental oversight in defining the global
public interest vis-a-vis the web. <O:P></O:P></SPAN><BR
class=Apple-interchange-newline><BR>For more details, see <A
href="http://goo.gl/d5GI8">http://goo.gl/d5GI8</A><BR><BR>Cheers<BR>Matthias<BR><BR><BR>Am
10.03.2012 22:32, schrieb Karl Auerbach:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:4F5BC880.9090803@cavebear.com type="cite"><PRE wrap="">On 03/10/2012 11:12 AM, michael gurstein wrote:
</PRE>
<BLOCKQUOTE type="cite"><PRE wrap="">Perhaps the next IGF should have some sessions focusing on the nature of,
and a definition for "the global public interest".
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><PRE wrap="">Might I suggest the following as a starting point?
+ Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way
that is privately beneficial without being publicly
detrimental.
- The burden of demonstrating public detriment shall
be on those who wish to prevent the private use.
- Such a demonstration shall require clear and
convincing evidence of public detriment.
- The public detriment must be of such degree and extent
as to justify the suppression of the private activity.
This is from <A class=moz-txt-link-freetext href="http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000059.html">http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000059.html</A>
--karl--
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>