<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Parminder et al, subject to correction and disclaimers for over
simplification etc... <br>
<br>
Thesi<b>s: The Bill is good for IG.</b><br>
<br>
(I am NOT the best person to make the case!!) <br>
<br>
It establishes a policy in legislation ensuring MS.<br>
<br>
It includes preservation as well as advancement - it incorporates
the possibility of future change.<br>
<br>
Political economy:<br>
<br>
Enshrines MS for internet. Increases democracy.<br>
<br>
Civil society:<br>
<br>
For or tepid toward the bill<br>
<br>
<b>Thesis: The bill is not good for IG.</b><br>
<br>
Imprecision: <br>
- reference to which ms models<br>
- which ones are successful (as opposed to unsuccessful - implying
selection)<br>
- what is MS?<br>
<br>
Political Economy:<br>
Changes developing countries are interested will be limited by US
legislation - "negotiation" with Congress?<br>
Limits change to to intrasystemic fora.<br>
<br>
To Civil Society<br>
If qualitative change is sufficient in this form, would alternate
but similarly competent (with MS) arrangements not be suitable.<br>
<br>
Riaz<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2013/04/18 09:01 AM, parminder
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:516F8C27.4000501@itforchange.net" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Thursday 18 April 2013 12:24 AM,
michael gurstein wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:074301ce3b9c$f6ab1ff0$e4015fd0$@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
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;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
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]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Okay
but can anyone point to an authoritative
definition/description of what exactly is meant by "the
successful multistakeholder model that governs the
Internet" i.e. what exactly was the US Congress voting
unanimously to "preserve and advance".</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
for instance, whether NTIA's exclusive exercising of the root zone
authorisation function is to be considered as a part of the
'successful multistakeholder (MS) model' or not... And if it is
indeed MS, then if <i>exactly</i> the same function is tranferred
to a multinational committee (without changing anything else about
ICANN plus system at all) why would that not still continue to be
called as a MS system, and not a movement from MSism to government
control?<br>
<br>
And whether OECD's inter governmental Council and its
inter-governmental Committee on Information, Communication and
Computer Policy doing considerable (global) Internet policy work,
in consultation with other stakeholders, but only giving them an
advisory capacity, should be considered as an aspect of the
'successful MS model or not. If so, whether a similar UN based
inter-gov committee with similar (or better) advisory status based
relationships with other stakeholders will continue to be called
as a MS system, or would that somehow, magically, become
classified as a move towards government control? <br>
<br>
The above two are the simple and straight forward demands of most
developing countries (leave out a few authoritarian ones whose
demand we dont have to consider/ concede) . Both these demands <i>do
not at all change the degree of MSism in the present global IG
architecture </i>(I am happy to be challenged on this) .
However, evidently this new US law is basically aimed at resisting
these democratic demands of developing countries, and the sad part
is that most of the global civil society seems to be ready to get
hoodwinked by such obviously less than honest professions of MSism
and fight against governemnt control over the Internet. It is just
a fight for preserving US control (gov plus business) over the
global Internet - that is all what it is. And CS should resist it,
seeking greater democratisation..<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:074301ce3b9c$f6ab1ff0$e4015fd0$@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">M<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<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"">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>John Curran<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, April 17, 2013 8:44 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><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>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Apr 12, 2013, at 8:56 PM, Jeremy
Malcolm <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:jeremy@ciroap.org">jeremy@ciroap.org</a>>
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<blockquote
style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><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><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">...<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">"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."<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This bill was just approved by the
House Committee on Energy and Commerce; it it is now <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">H.R. 1580, a bill to affirm the policy
of the United States regarding Internet governance.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF00/20130417/100723/BILLS-113pih-InternetFreedom.pdf">http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF00/20130417/100723/BILLS-113pih-InternetFreedom.pdf</a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The policy text has been changed
to only the following:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> "It is the policy of the
United States to preserve and advance the successful
multistakeholder<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> model that governs the
Internet."<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Given that it has bipartisan support,
it is likely to move fairly quickly to adoption. The
actual net<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">effect of such a statement becoming
official USG policy is subject to interpretation, but it
would <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">definitely make it difficult for the
USG to back away from the "multistakeholder model" at any<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">point in the future.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">FYI,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">/John<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Disclaimers: My views alone. No
congress critters were harmed in the production of this
email.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>