Conspiracy theorists of the world unite(?):<br><br><pre><a href="http://www.internetsociety.org/tpp" target="_blank">www.internetsociety.org/tpp</a></pre>
    <h1>To the negotiating nations of the Trans-Pacific Partnership
      (TPP) Agreement</h1>
    <div>
      <div>
        <div>
          <div>
            <div>
              <div> <a href="http://www.internetsociety.org/sites/default/files/TPP%20-%20transparency%20statement%28co-signed%29.pdf" target="_blank"><img src="cid:part2.02020103.06080102@eff.org" alt="Download PDF" height="21" width="114"> </a> </div>


            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </div>
    
      
        
          
            
              
                
                  
                    <p>The undersigned organizations would like to
                      express their concern regarding the procedural
                      aspects of the negotiations of the Trans-Pacific
                      Partnership (TPP) Agreement – especially, those
                      relating to transparency and inclusiveness.</p>
                    <p> Currently in its 15th round, the TPP has
                      followed a procedural path that, in our view, has
                      not been sufficiently inclusive and transparent.
                      The process of negotiations has hitherto followed
                      the traditional route of involving only
                      governments and governmental representatives. We
                      understand this approach to the extent that,
                      historically, trade-­‐related agreements have
                      always been conducted under a similar,
                      behind-­‐closed-­‐doors process. But, this is not
                      a typical trade agreement; it involves issues that
                      also extend to the Internet and its platforms –
                      and, this raises some valid questions regarding
                      process.</p>
                    <p> Back in 2005, during the World Summit on the
                      Information Society (WSIS) in Tunis, Heads of
                      States and government committed to the Tunis
                      Agenda, which included a section on Internet
                      Governance. Paragraph 34 of the Tunis Agenda,
                      described Internet governance as “the development
                      and application by governments, the private sector
                      and civil society, in their respective roles, of
                      shared principles, norms, rules, decision-­making
                      procedures, and programmes that shape the
                      evolution and use of the Internet”. By accepting
                      this working definition, Heads of States and
                      government have subscribed to the fact that all
                      issues pertaining to the Internet, including those
                      of public policy, should be detached from
                      traditional rule making and become part of a new
                      governance arrangement – one that is based on
                      cooperation, collaboration and partnership. Under
                      the Tunis Agenda, Internet governance is to be
                      conducted through a multistakeholder framework,
                      where each stakeholder participates, offering
                      different perspectives. In particular, article 68
                      of the Tunis Agenda states: “[...] We also
                      recognize the need for development of public
                      policy by governments in consultation with all
                      stakeholders”. We feel that multistakeholder
                      governance should constitute the foundation and
                      the basis for all future policy work in the
                      Internet space.</p>
                    <p> Internet governance is not a monolithic concept
                      and should not be considered as such; it is
                      constantly evolving to include all issues that,
                      directly or indirectly, affect the Internet and
                      its technologies. One such issue concerns the
                      protection of intellectual property rights and the
                      way they are expressed in the Internet. The recent
                      debate on SOPA and PIPA in the United States as
                      well as that of ACTA in the European Union
                      manifested that discussions on intellectual
                      property are part of the Internet governance
                      landscape and they further necessitate a
                      multistakeholder approach. It is only through an
                      inclusive process that all interested parties can
                      effectively engage and provide input on issues
                      that will, ultimately, have an impact on the way
                      users experience the Internet and its services.</p>
                    <p> In fact, various governments have started
                      upholding multistakeholder participation as their
                      official Internet governance position. In the
                      United States, for instance, both Democrats and
                      Republicans, in both Houses of Congress, have
                      affirmed the multistakeholder Internet governance
                      model and have unanimously passed resolutions
                      making clear that the “consistent and unequivocal
                      policy of the United States [is] to promote a
                      global Internet free from government control [and]
                      to preserve and advance the successful
                      multistakeholder model that governs the Internet
                      today”.</p>
                    <p> In view of the fact that countries, including
                      the United States, are endorsing multistakeholder
                      governance as their official position for all
                      Internet-­‐related matters, it only makes sense
                      for this model to be repeated in this instance. We
                      therefore urge the negotiators of the TPP to make
                      this process more transparent and inclusive,
                      following the multistakeholder model, at least for
                      those chapters of the agreement pertaining to the
                      Internet. Allowing all interested parties to
                      actively participate and provide input during the
                      negotiations, as called for by the Tunis Agenda,
                      would give a higher legitimacy to the process and,
                      would ensure a more informed agreement, bringing
                      in technical, economic and social perspectives.</p>
                    <p> Signed</p>
                    <p> The Internet Society (ISOC)<br>
                      Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)<br>
                      InternetNZ<br>
                      Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)</p><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 4 December 2012 05:32, Suresh Ramasubramanian <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:suresh@hserus.net" target="_blank">suresh@hserus.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>

<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>not a bad conspiracy theory, but pretty pedestrian for truthout<br><br>--srs (iPad)</div><div><br>

On 04-Dec-2012, at 7:58, Guru गुरु <<a href="mailto:Guru@ITforChange.net" target="_blank">Guru@ITforChange.net</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite">
  
    
  
  
    <div><br>
<a href="http://truth-out.org/news/item/13082-the-trans-pacific-partnership-what-free-trade-actually-means" target="_blank">http://truth-out.org/news/item/13082-the-trans-pacific-partnership-what-free-trade-actually-means</a><br>

<br></div></blockquote></div><br>____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
     <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
     <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance" target="_blank">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
     <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/" target="_blank">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t" target="_blank">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>