<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Saturday 13 April 2013 09:05 AM, Ian
Peter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:EE796AE9A5FF43279790844911092B2F@Toshiba"
type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE:
12pt">
<div>yes, the concept of no government involvement is
nonsense. The Public Knowledge response (or draft response,
it may have changed) included the following. Not that I
entirely agree with it, but it makes some relevant points
about the language.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>“ we fear that the broad language of the proposed bill
may</div>
<div>intrude on areas of consumer protection, competition
policy, law enforcement and</div>
<div>cybersecurity long considered appropriate for national
policy formulated by governments</div>
<div>with input from civil society, business and the technical
community. For example, the</div>
<div>United States has by law protected the privacy of
children online through Child Online</div>
<div>Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) for nearly 15 years.
Although we opposed the ITU</div>
<div>resolution to require countries to limit spam, the United
States protects its citizens from</div>
<div>spam through the CAN-SPAM Act. The Federal Trade
Commission (FTC), the Federal</div>
<div>Communications Commission (FCC), the Department of
Justice and numerous other</div>
<div>federal and state agencies have long played a critical
role in protecting consumers and</div>
<div>promoting competition and their existing statutes.</div>
<div>We fear that if this bill becomes law, rather than being
understood as simply a resolution</div>
<div>directed specifically against the efforts to expand the
jurisdiction of the ITU, these</div>
<div>important and long-standing government policies will be
undermined. Our opposition to</div>
<div>ceding authority to the ITU to decide how to balance
consumer protection and free</div>
<div>expression is not because we see no role for government
in protecting consumers or</div>
<div>promoting competition. Rather, we believe those matters
are best decided here at home,</div>
<div>by a Congress accountable to the people and enforced by a
government constrained by</div>
<div>the Constitution. Similarly, many who oppose addressing
cybersecurity or law</div>
<div>enforcement issues at the ITU regard it as entirely
appropriate for Congress or other</div>
<div>federal agencies to address these concerns, subject to
the Constitutional limitations of due</div>
<div>process and free expression.”</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
Public Knowledge's draft letter is most instructive of what has
really been happening in the global IG space. How the term
'government control' has been deviously used to further entrench
hegemonies, and a neoliberal paradigm. A paradigm of complete non
regulation of the emerging 'communication realm, put forward more
appealingly as 'an Internet free from governmental control', was the
name of the game at WCIT. Here the front of 'protecting Internet
freedoms' was employed to cover the real geo-economic intentions of
using the Internet as the new pillar of global domination by US and
its allies. We raised this issue through an oped in a top Indian
daily ' <a
href="http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/hyping-one-threat-to-hide-another/article4140922.ece">Hyping
one threat to hide another</a>'. <br>
<br>
The chickens have now come home to roost, as we had predicted in the
mentioned op-ed. Excuse me to quote it, I simply cant resist the
temptation . <br>
<br>
<blockquote>"What is happening at the ITU today, in good measure, is
this game of freeing our communication realm from all public
interest regulation. As mentioned, it is about a new paradigm of
‘complete non-regulation.’ And once the victory is achieved at the
ITU, whereby the Internet and other IP networks, which would soon
be the basis of all communication infrastructure, are considered
out of any kind of regulatory oversight, the game will then be
replayed at the national level, citing ‘global norms.’ "<br>
</blockquote>
US civil society was most active seeking that Internet - and with
it, really, all future communication systems - should 'completely'
stay out of ITU's realm. (Just opposing China/ Russia proposals of
'national Internet segement' and national control of CIRs etc is a
completely different matter. What was opposed was even references to
Internet related universal service obligations, net neutrlaity and
such things.) What was even more problematic was that civil society
from most developing countries also joined the (apparently well-
resourced) chorus. And now when this game of de-regulation of
communicative realm plays out in our respective national domains, do
give a thought to whether the manner in which the WCIT game got
played was the right thing to do for progressive causes... There is
yet opportunity to re-look at what is being done to our futures,
especially those of the marginalised people, in the name of
'Internet freedoms' and multistakeholderism. <br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:EE796AE9A5FF43279790844911092B2F@Toshiba"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE:
12pt">
<div> </div>
<div>Certainly a number of US groups have opposed the language
for this and similar reasons.</div>
<div style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY:
'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT:
normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<div style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<div> </div>
<div style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<div style="font-color: black"><b>From:</b> <a
moz-do-not-send="true" title="jeremy@ciroap.org"
href="mailto:jeremy@ciroap.org">Jeremy Malcolm</a> </div>
<div><b>Sent:</b> Saturday, April 13, 2013 12:56 PM</div>
<div><b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
title="governance@lists.igcaucus.org"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
</div>
<div><b>Subject:</b> [governance] US House Bill to
Affirm the Policy of the United States Regarding
Internet Governance</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY:
'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT:
normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<div>It doesn't seem to have been mentioned here yet (or
maybe only in passing) that there is a bill on Internet
governance being debated in the Energy & Commerce
Committee of the US House of Representatives at the
moment. There will doubtless be stampede of uncritical
support for it from politicians of all sides (there is no
hidden intellectual property "gotcha"), but unfortunately
its premises are fundamentally flawed.</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://energycommerce.house.gov/markup/markup-bill-affirm-policy-united-states-regarding-internet-governance">http://energycommerce.house.gov/markup/markup-bill-affirm-policy-united-states-regarding-internet-governance</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>It only has two sections: one on "Findings" and one on
"Policy regarding Internet governance", which flows from
the findings. The latter simply states:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>"It is the policy of the United States to promote a
global Internet free from government control and to
preserve and advance the successful multistakeholder model
that governs the Internet."</div>
<div> </div>
<div>So this is obviously nonsense; it is not US policy to
promote a global Internet free from government control,
only free from the control of other governments besides
itself. And note that US policy is only to "preserve and
advance" not to "enhance" the multistakeholder model,
which continues the fiction that the multistakeholder
institutions that we have now are adequate both in their
inclusiveness and in the breadth of Internet governance
topics that they cover.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Of course, you can argue for more beneficial
interpretations by defining "control" and
"multistakeholder model" expansively, but even so this
bill is just going to entrench the standoff between the US
and other countries, which is not going to be helpful in
reaching compromise on the evolution of Internet
governance arrangements this year...</div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none;
TEXT-INDENT: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal; FONT: medium
helvetica; WORD-WRAP: break-word; WHITE-SPACE: normal;
ORPHANS: 2; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break:
after-white-space; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px"><span
style="BORDER-SPACING: 0px; BORDER-COLLAPSE:
separate" class="Apple-style-span">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break:
after-white-space"><span style="WIDOWS: 2;
TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px;
BORDER-SPACING: 0px; LETTER-SPACING: normal;
BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate; FONT: medium
helvetica; WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2;
COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none"
class="Apple-style-span">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break:
after-white-space"><span style="LINE-HEIGHT:
normal; WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none;
FONT-VARIANT: normal; FONT-STYLE: normal;
TEXT-INDENT: 0px; BORDER-SPACING: 0px;
LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE:
separate; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica;
WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2;
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none"
class="Apple-style-span">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space"><span
style="LINE-HEIGHT: normal; WIDOWS: 2;
TEXT-TRANSFORM: none; FONT-VARIANT:
normal; FONT-STYLE: normal; TEXT-INDENT:
0px; BORDER-SPACING: 0px;
LETTER-SPACING: normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE:
separate; FONT-FAMILY: helvetica;
WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2;
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; WORD-SPACING: 0px;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect:
none" class="Apple-style-span">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space"><span
style="WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM:
none; TEXT-INDENT: 0px;
BORDER-SPACING: 0px; LETTER-SPACING:
normal; BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate;
FONT: medium helvetica; WHITE-SPACE:
normal; ORPHANS: 2; COLOR:
rgb(0,0,0); WORD-SPACING: 0px;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect:
none" class="Apple-style-span">
<div style="WORD-WRAP: break-word;
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space;
-webkit-line-break:
after-white-space"><span
style="LINE-HEIGHT: normal;
WIDOWS: 2; TEXT-TRANSFORM: none;
FONT-VARIANT: normal;
FONT-STYLE: normal; TEXT-INDENT:
0px; BORDER-SPACING: 0px;
LETTER-SPACING: normal;
BORDER-COLLAPSE: separate;
FONT-FAMILY: helvetica;
WHITE-SPACE: normal; ORPHANS: 2;
FONT-WEIGHT: normal;
WORD-SPACING: 0px;
-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect:
none" class="Apple-style-span">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:
break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode:
space; -webkit-line-break:
after-white-space"><span
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:
rgb(255,255,255)">-- </span><br
style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:
rgb(255,255,255)">
<p style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:
rgb(255,255,255); FONT-SIZE:
9pt"><b>Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br>
Senior Policy Officer<br>
Consumers International |
the global campaigning
voice for consumers</b><br>
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</p>
<p style="FONT-SIZE: 9pt">WCRD
2013 – Consumer Justice Now!
| Consumer Protection Map: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main">https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main</a>
| #wcrd2013</p>
<p style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:
rgb(255,255,255); FONT-SIZE:
9pt">@Consumers_Int | <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/">www.consumersinternational.org</a>
| <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational">www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a></p>
<p style="BACKGROUND-COLOR:
rgb(255,255,255); COLOR:
rgb(153,153,153); FONT-SIZE:
8pt">Read our <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality"
target="_blank">email
confidentiality notice</a>.
Don't print this email
unless necessary.</p>
</div>
</span></div>
</span></div>
</span></div>
</span></div>
</span></div>
</span></div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<p>
</p>
<hr>
____________________________________________________________<br>
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>
To be removed from the list, visit:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>
<br>
For all other list information and functions, see:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>
<br>
Translate this email:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>