<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
<div>Dear all,</div><div><br></div><div>My impression is that the workshop quality has increased, compared to IGF 6.</div><div><br></div><div>I think some efforts may be done in order to merge overlapping workshops but </div><div>it is important to stress the distinction between “duplicate workshops” and </div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">workshops </span><span style="font-size: 10pt;">that analyse similar issues from a different angle. Indeed, many of </span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">the workshops have similar titles but completely different contents, format, etc. </span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">For the sake of competition, I would say that it is better to have a wider choice </span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">of similar workshops and let the IGF participants “vote with their feet” by </span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">participating to the most valuable ones, rather than oblige workshop organisers </span></div><div><span style="font-size: 10pt;">to merge. </span></div><div><br></div><div>Furthermore, I would like to join Stuart’s nice comment on Workshop 146 (Intellectual </div><div>Property Rights and the freedom to share: are the two compatible?). Although my </div><div>opinion is not really impartial, because I was directly involved in the organization of </div><div>the workshop, I have to say that I received a lot of positive feedbacks and the </div><div>participants where extremely pleased by three main features of the session:</div><div> 1) the workshop was an <u>interactive roundtable</u>: panellists engaged in a </div><div>question-and-answer debate since the very beginning and they were not allowed </div><div>to deliver lectures (they had a maximum of 3-4 minutes to reply my questions); </div><div> 2) a large portion of the workshop was dedicated to <u>interventions from the audience</u>. </div><div>Indeed, we all know that some of the most interesting inputs to the workshops discussions </div><div>frequently come from the audience; </div><div> 3) we have decided to promote an <u>intergenerational dialogue</u>: the panel make-up </div><div>included 11 panellists that were born between the 1950s and 1990s, and that was </div><div>a real surplus value.</div><div><br></div><div>I know that is not realistic to involve youngsters in every workshop, but I believe </div><div>that the promotion of an intergenerational dialogue is the best way to seize the dynamics </div><div>of an intergenerational Internet. Moreover, having some new faces around can just help </div><div>strengthen <span style="font-size: 10pt;">the “legitimacy” of the IGF discussions. </span></div><div><br></div><div>Best regards.</div><div><br></div><div>Luca</div><div><br></div><div>PS: the workshop report will be available by the end of the week</div><div><br></div><div align="left" style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:10pt"><font style="font-size:10pt" face="Times New Roman" size="2"><em><font style="font-size:12pt" size="3"><a href="http://fr.linkedin.com/pub/luca-belli/24/20/1a4" target="_blank">Luca Belli</a></font></em></font><br><font class="ecxApple-style-span" color="#4f81bd"><font style="font-size:10pt" face="Times New Roman" size="2"><em></em><font style="font-size:10pt" size="2"><em>Doctorant en Droit Public</em></font></font></font></div><div align="left" style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:10pt"><font class="ecxApple-style-span" color="#4f81bd"><font style="font-size:10pt" face="Times New Roman" size="2"><font style="font-size:10pt" size="2"><em>CERSA,</em></font></font></font><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" style="color:rgb(79, 129, 189);font-size:10pt"><font size="2" style="font-size:10pt"><em><font face="Times New Roman"><em>Université </em></font></em></font></font><font face="Times New Roman" size="2" style="color:rgb(79, 129, 189);font-size:10pt"><font size="2" style="font-size:10pt"><em><font face="Times New Roman"><em>Panthéon-Assas</em></font></em></font></font></div><div align="left" style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:10pt"><font style="font-size:10pt" face="Times New Roman" size="2"><font style="font-size:10pt" size="2"><em><font style=""><font style="" face="Times New Roman"><em><font style="" color="#4f81bd"><a href="http://www.sorbonne-universites.fr/#KLINK" target="_blank">Sorbonne University</a></font></em></font></font></em></font></font></div><div align="left" style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:10pt"><font class="ecxApple-style-span" color="#4f81bd"><i><br></i></font></div><br><br><div><div id="SkyDrivePlaceholder"></div>> Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:46:29 +0100<br>> From: Stuart.Hamilton@ifla.org<br>> To: governance@lists.igcaucus.org; ajp@glocom.ac.jp<br>> Subject: RE: [governance] IGF Workshops<br>> <br>> Hi Adam<br>> <br>> From the perspective of the library groups at the IGF we also felt that<br>> the quality of the workshops was good. We tried to put reports about the<br>> ones we were involved in as up as we went along, so please feel free to<br>> take a look here:<br>> <br>> http://www.ifla.org/news/igf-baku-workshop-130-outcomes-digital-inclusio<br>> n-and-public-access-to-the-internet<br>> http://www.ifla.org/news/igf-baku-workshop-168-outcomes-capacity-buildin<br>> g-initiatives<br>> http://www.ifla.org/news/igf-baku-workshop-146-outcomes-intellectual-pro<br>> perty-rights-and-the-freedom-to-share<br>> <br>> A background brief on libraries and public access was produced by all<br>> the library groups present, and ISOC, and can be found here:<br>> http://www.ifla.org/files/assets/clm/WSIS/libraries_public_access.pdf <br>> <br>> Our first Dynamic Coalition workshop also went well, so there will be<br>> outcomes from that to share soon enough. For those of you interested in<br>> issues relating to public access to the Internet please consider joining<br>> the DC's mailing list: http://lists.apc.org/mailman/listinfo/pal-dc <br>> <br>> In general, I felt that that the sessions I got the most out of were<br>> those on intellectual property - there seemed to be more input from<br>> rightsholders this year (RIAA, Disney) and this made the discussions<br>> more interesting for me. It was good to get some input from the side of<br>> the media corps/reps as I feel previous IGF workshops on this topic have<br>> had quite a lot of groups from civil society in general agreement. Made<br>> for a better discussion.<br>> <br>> Cheers,<br>> <br>> Stuart<br>> <br>> -----Original Message-----<br>> From: apeake@gmail.com [mailto:apeake@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Adam Peake<br>> Sent: 13 November 2012 11:18<br>> To: governance@lists.igcaucus.org<br>> Subject: [governance] IGF Workshops<br>> <br>> A lot of people I spoke to in Baku last week were very positive about<br>> the workshops, pretty common message was that the content the best of<br>> any IGF. Not the main sessions, the workshops. I was working for the<br>> secretariat (contract ended with the conference), I didn't make it to<br>> any workshop, and not much outside the main hall.<br>> <br>> I'd love to hear of workshops and other meetings people found valuable.<br>> Is there something to build on for next year? Taking stock for the<br>> first consultation of next year will start soon (or soon'ish).<br>> <br>> Thanks,<br>> <br>> Adam<br>> <br>> <br></div> </div></body>
</html>