<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=us-ascii"><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;}
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.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
span.apple-tab-span
{mso-style-name:apple-tab-span;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle22
{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]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>For those who have been following the current discussion on MSism but may be a wee bit lost—</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> I’m expecting that there is some feeling that those nice folks that we all meet and drink with at various meetings in interesting parts of the world could not possibly be supporting a position which rejects democracy as the fundamental and aspirational model for global (Internet and other) governance.</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>But I’ve been waiting for the documentation, the argumentation, the set of references and white papers which outline what is actually meant by the Multi-stakeholder model of governance (apart from it not being about any form of democracy that any reasonable observer might agree with) that these folks have been so loudly and widely promoting as the new form of governance that will resolve the problems of the Internet and the weaknesses in current governance forms and processes. <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'>There is a terminology certainly, and there are an almost infinite number of exhortations for MS this and MS that but when it comes to details such as I and others have been requesting for several years and which I directly have been requesting over the last few days from those resident in these Internet Governance discussion spaces, and we know that all the leading lights of CS at least are resident in one or another of these spaces, the only response has been the trivial and trivializing comment from Gene Kimmelman that he (and presumably his CS colleagues) haven’t had time (over the last 3 or 4 years) to provide this information. Meanwhile they have been insisting at every possible juncture on a model of governance—MSist which would replace democracy as the fundamental organizing and aspirational principle for global (Internet) governance. <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'>Hmmm…. Either they don’t want to be explicit because they know what the reaction of the world would be or they really don’t know…<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'>So let me make a stab at it. Based on my fairly close reading of these discussions and following up on whatever few references have been pointed to, f</span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>or me the </span><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>documents below provide the best insight into what the MSists are proposing for the broad framework of global (Internet) governance for the future.<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'>The first document is from the World Economic Forum which, with funding from the Government of Qatar and others launched a research program “about ways in which international institutions and arrangements should be adapted to contemporary challenges”. The second is from a private (and largely corporate funded) think tank in the US which specializes in policy discussions. The third is from a private consulting firm specializing in corporate strategy but evidently supported in this effort by ISOC and a variety of corporate and other sponsors.<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'><a href="http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GRI_EverybodysBusiness_Report_2010.pdf">http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GRI_EverybodysBusiness_Report_2010.pdf</a> (particularly the Systemic Overview starting pp. 19<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'><a href="http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/upload/Toward_a_Single_Global_Digital_Economy_Aspen_IDEA_Project_0.pdf">http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/upload/Toward_a_Single_Global_Digital_Economy_Aspen_IDEA_Project_0.pdf</a> (worth taking a wander through the whole thing given the “stellar” nature of the contributors<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'><a href="http://gsnetworks.org/research_posts/the-remarkable-internet-governance-network-part-i/">http://gsnetworks.org/research_posts/the-remarkable-internet-governance-network-part-i/</a><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'><a href="http://gsnetworks.org/research_posts/the-remarkable-internet-governance-network-part-ii/">http://gsnetworks.org/research_posts/the-remarkable-internet-governance-network-part-ii/</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>IMHO it is worth spending a half day working one’s way through these documents as they provide the road map which the MSists appear to be following. Not much more detail on what MSism might actually mean in practice but lots of discussion on how it could be implemented to respond to a variety of policy “challenges” since “democratic” solutions are so, well, 20<sup>th</sup> century although the people who gave up their lives for Democracy during the Arab Spring, in the Ukraine, in Eastern Europe, and elsewhere might possibly disagree.<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'>If I’ve gotten the MSist canon/program wrong I would be delighted to be corrected and given direction to more appropriate documents.<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"'> David Cake [<a href="mailto:dave@difference.com.au">mailto:dave@difference.com.au</a>] <br><b>Sent:</b> Sunday, October 26, 2014 2:35 AM<br><b>To:</b> michael gurstein<br><b>Cc:</b> McTim; <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>; JNC Forum<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [bestbits] [governance] Tweedledum and Tweedledee WAS Re: Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU Plenipot joint recommendations<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal>On 26 Oct 2014, at 7:17 am, michael gurstein <<a href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">gurstein@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>and yet the MS proponents such as the USG and its allies in CS and<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>elsewhere want to remake the governance of the global (Internet) world in its image.<o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><br>NO, the opposite is true. The internet is cooperatively coordinated by a series of MS entities and processes. It is those who insist that gov't be in charge that are trying to "remake the governance of the global (Internet)"<br>[MG>] well maybe those "who insist that gov't be in charge" believe whatever it is you say they believe (you should ask them) but not sure what that has to do with my comments...<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>Well, you could always ask your JNC colleague Richard Hill about why he was so keen on the ITU taking on more control over Internet governance, I'm sure he will be happy to explain. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>If you, or the JNC generally, believe that government led, multi-lateral, fora such as the ITU, are also inappropriate for transnational Internet government, I'm sure there are many who would appreciate clarifying your position. <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>Maybe it is all being done in good faith and with the best of<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>intentions (and I have a bridge in Brooklyn which you might want to<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>buy—cheap) or maybe it is a calculated move by some and naivety by<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>others to find a way of giving the global (primarily US based)<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>corporates a governance model which formalizes and legitimizes their<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>increasingly dominant position in the variety of areas of global<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>governance of which the Internet is only one—<o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><br>No, we just want to keep MSism as the dominant paradigm of IG, not of any other area of governance.<br>[MG>] good for you... but you should take you nose out of the router box and take a look at<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br><a href="http://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/attachments/US%20Steercom%20Reelection%20Letter%20-%20signed%20by%20J%206-12-14.pdf">http://www.opengovpartnership.org/sites/default/files/attachments/US%20Steercom%20Reelection%20Letter%20-%20signed%20by%20J%206-12-14.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></blockquote><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>I find myself truly baffled as to what you find so sinister about USG support of open government initiatives. Is this just circular reasoning, whereby it is deemed to be bad because the USG is doing it, which can then be taken as an example of the USGs sinister agenda?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>I know the open government folks in Australia, and they are terrific, the open government movement is something I would have thought CS was unreservedly in favour of, but apparently not.... <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><a href="http://www.oecd.org/investment/mne/34304919.pdf">http://www.oecd.org/investment/mne/34304919.pdf</a><br><a href="http://www.slideshare.net/OECD-DAF/kane-may2014">http://www.slideshare.net/OECD-DAF/kane-may2014</a><br>etc.etc.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>Yes, corporate investment in nations with weak governance raises a host of policy questions, and the USG has a position on this. Are there specific relevant points in regards to Internet governance, or transnational governance in general, that you are trying to make here?<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></p><div><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'>They also overlook the extent to which attempts to improve these<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>implementations have been fiercely resisted. Do I even need to<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>mention this? Jean-Christophe says "MS has mainly kept the status<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>quo, and will keep maintaining it if CS do not change their music" -<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>how can it be said that civil society has been in favour of the status<span class=apple-converted-space> </span><br>quo in multi-stakeholder Internet governance?<o:p></o:p></span></p></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:9.0pt'><br><br>Because by and large CS is in favour of MSism. We saw that from WSIS thru NetMundial.<o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>CS is in favour of MSism, but that doesn't mean the status quo. Look at, for example, the moves through NetMundial and within ICANN to bring human rights explicitly into the policy processes of technical organisations, largely led by CS (and resisted by the technical community). <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>Cheers<o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span class=apple-tab-span> </span>David<o:p></o:p></p></div></div></body></html>