<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<base href="x-msg://4608/"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Courier New \;color\:\#1F497D";
panose-1:0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
span.apple-style-span
{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body bgcolor="white" lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">Jeremy:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">By now you should be aware that the bill was amended to remove the clause about opposing “government control of the Internet.” This suggests to me that you are wrong
about it being bogus. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">Faced with a choice between articulating a global public policy principle that could be used to challenge some of the US government’s own special powers and gutting
the bill so that it only contains an anodyne expression of support for “the multistakeholder model,” the U.S. congress chose the latter.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">I’ll blog on this topic in more detail, but to me their need to delete it due to the concerns expressed by Rep. Eshoo bolsters my feeling that it was a good principle.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D">The analogy with the USSR (or Chinese) constitution is quite bogus, however, because there was no freedom of expression in USSR so public advocacy could not call attention
to the contradiction between the principle and the reality. In the U.S. that would not be the case.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext"> governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Jeremy Malcolm<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, April 16, 2013 11:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> governance@lists.igcaucus.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [governance] US House Bill to Affirm the Policy of the United States Regarding Internet Governance<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 16/04/13 23:10, Milton L Mueller wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New ;color:#1F497D","serif""> </span>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New ;color:#1F497D","serif"">[Milton L Mueller] By “ignored” you mean that Rep. Walden refused to modify his principle to make an exception for U.S. forms of control. Which is all
to the good. The principle stands.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal">...<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><i><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Courier New ;color:#1F497D","serif"">[Milton L Mueller] I think the bill provides a good principle to guide that “unfinished work.” You know, or should know, that most of the countries pushing
for “enhanced cooperation” want governments to assume a greater role in making and enforcing “public policy” for the global internet. ... Remember that “WSIS Principles” under the TA means that governments are the primary source of Internet public policy,
and the rest of us provide “input” which they may utilize as they see fit. So we truly NEED a statement of the principle that IG should not lead to “government control of the internet.” Tell me again why you oppose that?
</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
Because from this source, it is bogus. It's like the old constitution of the USSR which said things like "citizens of the USSR are guaranteed freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly, meetings, street processions and demonstrations". The meaning that
it bears on its face is so palpably at variance with the way it is applied that to say is little more than an insult. The only good point I can see about this is that it will highlight how bald-faced is the US government's hypocrisy on control of the Internet,
but it was pretty apparent already anyway.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <o:p></o:p></p>
<p><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt">Dr Jeremy Malcolm<br>
Senior Policy Officer<br>
Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers</span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><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<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:9.0pt">WCRD 2013 – Consumer Justice Now! | Consumer Protection Map:
<a href="https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main">https://wcrd2013.crowdmap.com/main</a> | #wcrd2013<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:9.0pt">@Consumers_Int | <a href="http://www.consumersinternational.org">
www.consumersinternational.org</a> | <a href="http://www.facebook.com/consumersinternational">
www.facebook.com/consumersinternational</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:8.0pt;color:#999999">Read our <a href="http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality" target="_blank">
email confidentiality notice</a>. Don't print this email unless necessary.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>