<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'><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"'> Richard Hill [mailto:rhill@hill-a.ch] <br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 27, 2014 3:57 AM<br><b>To:</b> michael gurstein; 'David Cake'<br><b>Cc:</b> bestbits@lists.bestbits.net; 'McTim'; 'JNC Forum'<br><b>Subject:</b> RE: [JNC - Forum] [bestbits] [governance] Tweedledum and TweedledeeWAS Re: Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITUPlenipot joint recommendations<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Michael: since I don't subscribe to the BestBits list, and since I am mentioned by name in a post to that list, I would appreciate it if you would forward this reply to that list, if you consider that appropriate.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>I've been asked to explain why I'm so keen on the ITU taking over more control over Internet governance.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Actually, I'm mostly keen to find ways to reduce the control over Internet governance currently excercised by the US government and by dominant private companies, most of which are US companies. As an input to discussions, I have indeed suggested that ITU could, for some specific issues, replace the US government's current oversight with a weaker type of oversight. But that's just one of the many options that I think worth considering.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Regarding ITU, I find it incongrous that some people appear to think of it as an foe of the Internet. In reality, it was the ITU's 1988 ITRs that first allowed unrestricted use of leased lines by private companies, which was instrumental in facilitating the growth of the Internet. The subsequent GATT (now WTO) agreements reinforced that. ITU-T Recommendation X.509, first approved in 1988, provides the basis for secure Internet communications. More recently, ITU standards such as xDLS and compression are important facilitators of Internet expansion, as are the agreements made in ITU regarding the unlicensed frequencies used for WiFi.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Which is not to say that everything that ITU has done is good. But I also find it incongrous that people don't equally criticize other international organizations whose impact on the Internet is significant, such as WIPO, where copyright tends to be reinforced, rather than adapted as many think it should (greater allowance for private copying and shortening the length of copyright protection). Or WTO, which was used to forge ACTA. Again, not everything that those organizations do is bad. Like many complex organizations, including national goverments and private companies, those organizations do things that I agree with and things that I don't agree with.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>My view is that states do have a role and responsiblity with respect to public policy matters. That's a mainstream view, because it is enunciated in the Tunis Agenda and it was confirmed by Netmundial and by the WSIS+10 High Level Meeting. The mechanisms that currently exist under which states carry out their responsibilities are imperfect, both at the national level, and at the international level, and those mechansims should be improved.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Greater multi-stakholder consultation is for sure a way to improve those mechanisms. But replacing those mechanisms with the so-called "equal footing" multi-stakeholder model, which in effect gives veto power to private companies, is not, in my view, an improvement.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Formal intergovernmental mechanisms are subject to parliamentary control, and, in particular treaties are, in most countries, subject to ratification by national parliaments. It is harder to establsh democratic control over informal mechanisms, contracts of adhesion, and restrictions imposed by code (as in "code is law").</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><br><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Returning to ITU again, in my experience, it can be a useful forum for discussing certain issues, and even for reaching agreement at the international level. For example, to lower the price of mobile roaming, and/or to foster greater transparency in wholesale and retail pricing. I find it incongrous that OECD countries appear to oppose such measures, and that not all of civil society organizaitons support such pro-consumer measures.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Further, I believe that the current provision in the ITU Constitution on secrecy (meaning privacy) of international telecommunications could be revised so as to make it clear that current mass surveillance practices are unacceptable. I'm surprised that those who oppose mass surveillance have not picked up on that.</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Best,</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:blue'>Richard</span><o:p></o:p></p></div><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt;margin-left:3.75pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>-----Original Message-----<br><b>From:</b> Forum [<a href="mailto:forum-bounces@justnetcoalition.org">mailto:forum-bounces@justnetcoalition.org</a>]<b>On Behalf Of </b>michael gurstein<br><b>Sent:</b> dimanche, 26. octobre 2014 19:31<br><b>To:</b> 'David Cake'<br><b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:bestbits@lists.bestbits.net">bestbits@lists.bestbits.net</a>; 'McTim'; 'JNC Forum'<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [JNC - Forum] [bestbits] [governance] Tweedledum and TweedledeeWAS Re: Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITUPlenipot joint recommendations</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>David,<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><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>[MG>] I have no specialized knowledge or expertise in the details of transnational governance. My discussion was at the level of principles and governance models the detailed application of which I would leave to those (such as Richard Hill) with such specialized knowledge. My own position would be that such governance should take place in the form and in the context most likely to reflect the broader democratic values. I would not either rule in or rule out any specific context prima facie simply because it was or was not a UN agency for example (as seems to be the case for MSists/anti-Democracy proponents). In any case my overall principle would be how the venue and process would most clearly reflect democratic values and processes and for many cases how these activities might further promote and support democratic processes and values. I presume that MSists/anti-Democracy proponents would adopt a similar position concerning MSism i.e. how the particular venue (for example the proposed WEF as a venue) would promote MSism i.e. governance by self-selected elites and further undermining of traditional approaches to Democratic values and governance processes. (BTW, I’m still waiting for the argument from our distinguished CS colleagues towards the HK demonstrators on how MSism will be a “evolutionary enhancement” of the democracy that they have so bravely been advocating.</span></i></b><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....<span style='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></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>[MG>] I was in this casual listing simply responding to McTim’s quite ill-informed comment that MSism is not being applied in any other area of “governance” however I think my inclusion here of Open Government initiatives in this listing was over-hasty. In fact OG/OGD/OGP activities differ quite significantly from IG MSism in that for OG the MS activities are clearly confined to advisory and accountability processes and not decision making.. A further difference is that, at least at the moment there is no significant corporate involvement in the OGP MS processes (a source of concern it should be said to certain of the governmental proponents of OGP). (I have <a href="http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2011/07/03/are-the-open-data-warriors-fighting-for-robin-hood-or-the-sheriff-some-reflections-on-okcon-2011-and-the-emerging-data-divide/">blogged quite extensively on OG activities</a>.)</span></i></b><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><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>[MG>] no, this is simply a listing pointing to other areas where attempts are being made to implant MSism as a mechanism for global governance. There was a very extensive documentation recently on an attempt including through very heavy corporate involvement, NGO greenwashing, policy log-rolling in favour of corporate interests from various specific national governments, and so on to derail (or rather reconstruct in a MS format) a series of multi-lateral agreements and I believe treaty processes for controlling of deforestation. The result was, rather than a treaty there was a toothless MS governance framework which postponed effective action by at least a decade, made a few NGO/consultants and their corporate clients rich and effectively screwed the rest of us by preventing intervention into a highly destructive (to the common good) lucrative (to the multinational logging companies) status quo of forest cover destruction--(sound familiar at all). (I can’t put my finger on the references at the moment but perhaps someone reading this will pass along the relevant link.) </span></i></b><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).<span style='color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>[MG>] <u>some</u> of CS is in favour of MSism… Full-throated almost messianic support for MSism within CS is (thankfully) only confined to the IG space at the moment. The technical community may be resisting human rights in the IG space because of their built in blinders and general policy narrow-mindedess but the corporate folks have no problem with trading off support for HR as in “freedom of expression” and “freedom of assembly” for CS support since it costs them nothing and gains them a huge degree of credibility including with their staff and major market demographics. (It also not coincidentally fits quite well with their “open networks” business models and global marketing strategies.) Just see what happens with that support when, as is conventionally promoted by CS, the inclusion of “social justice” as a Human Right is promoted. I’m still waiting for any of the conventional CS groups in the IG space to come out with a strong position arguing for human rights and social justice i.e. human rights not just for the white Developed Country middle class folks but also as it benefits everyone else in the world.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></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><b><i><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>M</span></i></b><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></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></blockquote></div></body></html>