<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)"><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:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-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;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle21
{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;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
{mso-list-id:477693574;
mso-list-template-ids:3176086;}
@list l0:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1
{mso-list-id:622927653;
mso-list-type:hybrid;
mso-list-template-ids:705464852 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715 67698703 67698713 67698715;}
@list l1:level1
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level3
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1:level4
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level5
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level6
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l1:level7
{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level8
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l1:level9
{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:none;
mso-level-number-position:right;
text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l2
{mso-list-id:1075861349;
mso-list-template-ids:-398428528;}
@list l3
{mso-list-id:1324162070;
mso-list-template-ids:-2131214862;}
@list l3:level1
{mso-level-start-at:2;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l3:level2
{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
mso-level-tab-stop:1.0in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l4
{mso-list-id:1689478597;
mso-list-template-ids:299665284;}
@list l4:level1
{mso-level-start-at:3;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
@list l5
{mso-list-id:1883782051;
mso-list-template-ids:890019420;}
@list l5:level1
{mso-level-start-at:2;
mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
mso-level-number-position:left;
text-indent:-.25in;}
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
--></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 lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>For those out there who might not be catching Andrew’s drift behind the buzz word barrage and portensious evoking of the Cold War (us guys with white hats and those guys with black hats) let me de-construct his various communications…<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>AP: And I fail to see how a hierarchical state based system of decision making – which is the alternative being proposed – answers your questions or as I prefer to think of it - offers me any sees of how my interests as a user will be taken care off. That to me is the important question<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>MG: “a hierarchical state based system of decision making” popularly known to most of the world as “democracy”<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>MG: “my interests as a user will be taken care off” otherwise intelligible as “my interests as a privileged white Developed Country male living under the benign and enabling gaze of the GCHQ”<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>AP: The kind of governments wanting to assert “state sovereignty” over the internet, to use Russia’s phrase, have no interest in my concerns whereas most civil society groups that I have see active in this space do. So I’d like to see them at the table<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>MG: “governments wanting to assert “state sovereignty” over the internet” i.e. everybody who doesn’t buy into my cuckoo cloud land ideal state of totally benign, selfless and public spirited “multi-stakeholders”—such as Internet tax dodgers Amazon and Google, technical community stakeholders like the NSA, various Google greenwashing NGO’s such as…,etc.etc.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoNormal><i><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>AP: There¹s clearly two views emerging in civil society on IG - a one based on an established hierarchical system among states and the other - as said below - an innovative bottom, transparent, accountable, open multistakeholder policy development process where governments are just one (vey important) stakeholder, but do not have a veto rights<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>MG: “established hierarchical system among states” namely the UN and associated multilateral bodies where the writ of King Silicon Valley and the Internet Freedom crusaders has only partial sway i.e. the place where even the little people have a chance to be heard <o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>MG: “innovative” – innovation for who and whose benefit http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2010/08/02/silicon-valleys-to-community-informatics-neighbourhoods/<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>MG: “bottom (up)” – the point of my questions – I don’t see any bottom up processes—a lot of networking of the already networked <a href="http://www.worldsummit2003.de/en/web/847.htm">http://www.worldsummit2003.de/en/web/847.htm</a> and http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/if-multistakeholderism-had-prevailed-in-the-late-19thearly-20th-century-would-women-have-the-vote-would-we-still-have-slavery/<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>MG: “transparent” and ” accountable” hmmm http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/03/20/multistakeholderism-vs-democracy-my-adventures-in-stakeholderland/<o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>MG: “open” – open for who and in whose benefit <a href="http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/%E2%80%9Copen%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-%E2%80%9Cnecessary%E2%80%9D-but-not-%E2%80%9Csufficient%E2%80%9D/">http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/%E2%80%9Copen%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-%E2%80%9Cnecessary%E2%80%9D-but-not-%E2%80%9Csufficient%E2%80%9D/</a><o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>And in case anyone was wondering <a href="http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/in-defense-of-multistakeholder-processes/">http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/in-defense-of-multistakeholder-processes/</a></span><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:#1F497D'>M</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></p><p class=MsoPlainText><i><span style='color:black'>M</span></i><span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='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"'> Andrew Puddephatt [mailto:Andrew@gp-digital.org] <br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 06, 2014 6:13 AM<br><b>To:</b> michael gurstein; '"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"'; governance@lists.igcaucus.org; 'parminder'; 'Jeremy Malcolm'<br><b>Cc:</b> bestbits@lists.bestbits.net<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: Alternatives?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>And I fail to see how a hierarchical state based system of decision making – which is the alternative being proposed – answers your questions or as I prefer to think of it - offers me any sees of how my interests as a user will be taken care off. That to me is the important question<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'>The kind of governments wanting to assert “state sovereignty” over the internet, to use Russia’s phrase, have no interest in my concerns whereas most civil society groups that I have see active in this space do. So I’d like to see them at the table<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><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='color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='color:black'>michael gurstein <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>><br><b>Date: </b>Thursday, 6 March 2014 14:00<br><b>To: </b>andrew Puddephatt <<a href="mailto:andrew@gp-digital.org">andrew@gp-digital.org</a>>, "'\"Kleinwächter", "<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>" <<a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>>, "<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>" <<a href="mailto:parminder@itforchange.net">parminder@itforchange.net</a>>, Jeremy Malcolm <<a href="mailto:Jeremy@Malcolm.id.au">Jeremy@Malcolm.id.au</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>"<<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.%20net">bestbits@lists. net</a>>" <<a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>><br><b>Subject: </b>RE: Alternatives?<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.5pt;color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><div><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>Andrew, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>I fail to see how Wolfgang's discussion of MSism as an ideal type (using the narrowly technical issues addressed by the IETF as his example) addresses any of the reality based questions that I posed.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>Perhaps you (or Wolfgang or others) could either indicate how Wolfgang's comments do address my questions or respond to them yourself.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>As a reminder I'm copying them in below...<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Reading your contribution I’m left with more questions than answers I’m afraid..</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'>What are the details for the formation/determination of “stakeholders”—do they pursue their interests/stakes or do they pursue the public good<o:p></o:p></li></ol><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=1><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=a><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>How are divergent interests/conflicts within stakeholder groups handled<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>Is this transparent<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>What are the accountability mechanisms here<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>Who/how is “legitimacy” accorded/denied—by what authority<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>Who gives legitimacy to the legitimizers<o:p></o:p></li></ol></ol><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=2 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'>Decision making processes—i.e. how are divergent interests/conflicts between stakeholders handled <o:p></o:p></li></ol><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=2 type=1><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=1 type=a><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>who gets to deny consensus and how can we be at all certain that the result is in the public interest—<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>can/should those with specific private interests be in a position to deny consensus/force consensus on their terms (Parminder’s point about the private sector being equal with governments in making decisions) <o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>Is there an artificial drive to a forced consensus<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>Can private interests drive decisions and what is to prevent this<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level2 lfo3'>Is there such a thing as “conflict of interest”—who is responsible for this—how is it policed, sanctions<o:p></o:p></li></ol></ol><ol style='margin-top:0in' start=3 type=1><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'>How to ensure true diversity of opinion including among those who challenge the way in which the issues are framed—diversity of “identity” is relatively easy, normative diversity is rather more difficult to achieve and handle <o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'>How is the very real danger of capture guarded against<o:p></o:p></li><li class=MsoNormal style='color:#1F497D;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3'>What would be the process of deepening participation/consultation<o:p></o:p></li></ol><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>Without dealing with the above and associated reality based questions you and the other MSist advocates are expecting folks to buy a pig in a poke… alright perhaps for some – the powerful and the networked but dangerous indeed for everyone else.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>M</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Andrew Puddephatt [<a href="mailto:Andrew@gp-digital.org">mailto:Andrew@gp-digital.org</a>] <br>Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 5:47 AM<br>To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>; parminder; michael gurstein; Jeremy Malcolm<br>Cc: <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a><br>Subject: Re: Alternatives?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>I think Wolfgang expresses my view of the issues very well and I don¹t think I can add to it. There¹s clearly two views emerging in civil society on IG - a one based on an established hierarchical system among states and the other - as said below - an innovative bottom, transparent, accountable, open multistakeholder policy development process where governments are just one (vey important) stakeholder, but do not have a veto rights<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>Let¹s now see whose case is more persuasive<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>On 06/03/2014 11:31, ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang""<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'><<a href="mailto:wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>wolfgang.kleinwaechter@medienkomm.uni-halle.de</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Andrew:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Where I think we disagree is that I think you believe governments <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>should in the end, make the final decisions about the internet as they <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>are the sole source of legitimacy (please correct me if I misunderstand you).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Parminder<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>You do understand correctly. I believe that for global public policies <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>the final public policy decision has to be taken by governments. This <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>is so for policies in all area, whether climate change, health, trade, <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>IP, or any other. That is an imperfect system, but that is the best we got...<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>We should continually improve it, as various submissions from my <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>organisation has sought, and well, IGF is a great reform measure, to <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>help, but not do, policy making.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Wolfgang:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>The reality is - and will remain for a long future - that the 190+ <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>governments of the UN member states will be unable to agree and to <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>reach consensus. WCIT was in so far a watershed because it demonstrated <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>that there is no political will to agree on an the continuation of an <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>already existing (more technical) treaty with some amendements. The <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>only thing you will get out - if you follow Parminders advice - is "an <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>agreement to disagree" (as enhanced cooperation).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>With other words: If you continue with this established hierarchcial <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>system with intergovernmental treaties at the top, you will get nothing.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>You will end up in endless political and ideological battles The most <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>restrictive government will determine where the "red line is". This <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>will be a blockade for the next 20 years of Internet development with <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>no new technical and economic innovations, growing restrictions for <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>individual rights and freedoms, slowing down social and economic <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>development - in particular in developing countries - reducing job <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>opportunies and something more.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>The only way to bypass this is - as it has proved the last 20 years - <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>the innovative bottom, transparent, accountable, open multistakeholder <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>policy development process where governments are just one (vey <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>important) stakeholder, but do not have a veto right and have to <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>communicate, coordinate and collaborate on an equal footing among <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>themsleves and with other stakeholders (which have to demonstrate their <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>legitimacy) on an issue by issue basis towards rough consensus. And you <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>need more non-governmental stakeholders from underprivilegd regions - <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>in particular developing countries - to balance (governmental and <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>non-governmental) monopolies, domination and capture.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Study the IETF what rough consensus means. As long as the rough <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>consensus is based on an open standard, it can be always enhanced and <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>amended if new developments, (politcal) constellations and (social and <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>economic) oppotunties arrive. So it is never the last word. But it <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>helps to move (or stumble) forward to the benefit of the vast majority <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>which is represented by the (multistakeholder) rough consensus.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>The big chance of NetMundial is that there could be a multistakeholder <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>rough consensus around very high level, legally non binding general <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>principles (which would allow also some governments to make <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>reservations in line with the mechanisms which has been build into the <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Human Rights Declarations with regad to Article 19 and Article 29) and <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>to agree on a multistakeholder road map which singles out issues of <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>concern and gives a direction how to approach them (this could include <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>also timelines and the launch of multistakeholder mechanisms like <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>clearing houses, taks forces, observatories etc.).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>But the very concrete public policy arrangements - from Privacy to <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Security to Intellectual Property - will be made probably via <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>bi-lateral or regional arrangements negotiated in a multistakeholder environment.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>And the outcome of this "Internet Governance Bilateralism" or "Internet <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>Governance Regionalism" will produce another set of conflicts because a <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>bilateral Chinese - Russian agreement on Internet Privacy would <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>probably look rather different from the EU Directive (with 28 member <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>states) and the EU Directive is also rather differerent from the US privacy approach.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>And also Brazil, South Africa, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia (in particular <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>the governments) will keep their own positions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>However, as long as you put this (very often historical and cultural<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>determined) conflicts into a broader set of principles you avoid an <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>escalation among the conflicting positions because at the end of the <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>day all the different groups feel polically (and morally) bound by <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>those set of principles, which will have the support not only by <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>governments of the UN member states but also by all the other non-governmental stakeholders.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>This is a unique chance. It will not settle all problems and will not <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>save the world. But it is a step forward at the right moment and in the <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>right direction. The adoption of the Human Rights Declaration did not <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>stop violations of human rights. But it offered a reference point which <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>helped to reduce such violations.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>If we neglect or ignore this, the alternative will be that we are <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>>moving backwards into the 19th Century or even worse, into the Middle Ages.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='color:black'>> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div></body></html>