<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 Friday 25 October 2013 12:05 AM,
Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2535A90@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css" id="owaParaStyle"></style>
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color:
#000000;font-size: 10pt;">This is a perfect example of why I've
been warning you to focus in on things the IG community actually
knows something about and can do something about, such as the
IANA contract and ICANN accountability, rather than posing as a
global parliament and thinking that you can legislate across 27
different sectors of the economy, taxation and even national
security.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Any meeting, in Rio or elsewhere in 2014, that takes on the
agenda suggested by Parminder below, will get nowhere. Not
just because the issues are too diverse and there will not
even be a suitable knowledge base, much less consensus on
policy outcomes, but also because any such group would totally
lack the authority required to address such issues. Lacking
such authority, the meeting will be NO DIFFERENT from an IGF.
So why do it in Rio? Why not the IGF?<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<div id="divRpF600845" style="font-family: 'Times New
Roman'; font-size: 16px; direction: ltr;">
----</div>
<div id="divRpF600845" style="font-family: 'Times New
Roman'; font-size: 16px; direction: ltr;">
Parminder's agenda</div>
<div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size:
16px;">>global public policy development in
substantive areas like norms/ guidelines/ legal
frameworks </div>
<div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size:
16px;">>for privacy, net neutrality, taxation issues
around cross border e-com, competition issues, and </div>
<div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size:
16px;">>the so many other areas of public policy
areas.... <br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Please read my original email... This is not my agenda, but a
question to Bill/ others whether this is the intended broader area
of interest of the I* community to extend ICANN model of governance
to.... I addressed a question to this effect to Chris Disspain at
the meeting they organised on 'Brazil meeting' and he said, yes, we
are *not* talking about technical governance side only but this
other side of larger IG issues would be a central focus of the
Brazil meeting... Their intention of course is to try and extend the
ICANN model of governance to these areas of substantive policy
making. <br>
<br>
I asked Brazilians at another meeting about the scope the proposed
Brazil meeting, and they too said, our intention is to address all
global IG issues and not only of the technical governance kind. <br>
<br>
Personally, I dont have a problem with an international meeting
solving at least one important problem of global IG - which is the
oversight issue and internationalisation of tech gov system. I dont
even have a problem with a meeting focussing exclusively on this
one set of issues. However, any such effort should not become a
cover for making no progress - or in other words, blocking progress
- on the other issues that I indicated are even more important to
me.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2535A90@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color:
#000000;font-size: 10pt;">
<div>
<div>
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size:
16px;">----</div>
<div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2">(I myself am eager
to work on the "many other areas of public policy
areas")</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2">Ironically, here
in Washington I also heard the ICANN representative
talking about how the Rio meeting should address
many new, "orphan" issues such as.....wait for
it.....cybersecurity! Yeah, that's a problem that's
going to be solved by a one off meeting with 1000
people in it, for sure.... </font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2">I can explain this
absurd position in two possible ways: first, it may
be that the I* orgs would prefer that Brazil, other
governments and everyone else waste their time
chatting about "global public policy development"
(i.e., duplicating the IGF) rather than actually
solving ICANN's accountability and IANA problem.
After all, we've seen what IGF has accomplished in 7
years. A neo-IGF will do the same, but might manage
to maintain the illusion for governments that
something new is happening.</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2">Another, slightly
less cynical explanation is that they want this Rio
meeting to pre-empt the ITU plenipot, as some states
still want the ITU to do cybersecurity. So
apparently these people are so irrationally afraid
of the ITU that they would rather push vital areas
of policy into hastily thrown together and poorly
designed multistakeholder processes just so they can
say that the ITU doesn't need to do it. </font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"><br>
</font></div>
<div class="PlainText"><font size="2"> </font></div>
<div class="PlainText" style="font-family: 'Times New
Roman';"><font size="3"><br>
</font></div>
</div>
<div style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size:
16px;"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>