<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 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#954F72;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
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-CA link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoPlainText>I wasn't in Sao Paulo and certainly not privy to the internal workings of the drafting committee but I do very well recall <a href="http://document.netmundial.br/1-internet-governance-principles/">this document</a> as having been the summary document circulated for comments, which notably doesn’t have " the public interest text … in the opening of the statement" as you are indicating.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I don’t recall now how or where I made the input I indicated (my participation at the time was spotty having some health issues that absorbed a considerable amount of time and attention), but I believe it was on a markup version at some point and I do recall being appalled at reading the version I've indicated above including having read the various comments on the document where there was no indication from anyone that there should be an appropriate normative contextualizing statement at the beginning.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>M<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span lang=EN-US style='mso-fareast-language:EN-CA'>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Anriette Esterhuysen [mailto:anriette@apc.org] <br>Sent: February 26, 2015 9:33 AM<br>To: parminder; governance@lists.igcaucus.org; Michael Gurstein<br>Subject: Re: [governance] Managing the Internet in the Public Interest</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Dear all<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>As one of the co-chairs of the drafting group who drafted the NETmundial principles I know exactly how the "public interest" and "global reesource" text got there.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Good that you submitted it Michael - I don't recall seeing your particular submission but it was actually in other submissions as well.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>There were many - beforehand and during the event itself. We also battled text choices out on site in the drafting group which had representatives of all stakeholder groups on it. The secretariat - and they deserve a lot of credit - tried their best to respect submissions.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Those of us in drafting group made sure that the public interest text was in the opening of the statement. There are also other bits of good text which is there because of the efforts of civil society people present - and because there were good submissions from civil society - including from IGC.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Parminder is correct that the text 'global resource' was compromise text.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Some people, including APC, wanted global public good (it is in our NETmundial submission - I quote: "APC has participated actively in [snip] driven by the conviction that the internet is a global public good and a vital enabler of social justice, development, peace, environmental sustainability, gender equality and human rights."<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/association-for-progressive-communications-apc-contributions-to-the-netmundial-global-multistakeholder-meeting-on-the-future-of-internet-governance/274"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://content.netmundial.br/contribution/association-for-progressive-communications-apc-contributions-to-the-netmundial-global-multistakeholder-meeting-on-the-future-of-internet-governance/274</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>In that context though global public good was not text that anyone else fought for, and after some options we opted for global resource particularly as President Roussef and Neelie Kroes had used that that term.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Also, there was a trade off as there often is in such drafting processes, and I felt that 'managed in the public interest' was significant.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Yes, it is vague, but it is important. As a principle it means it has to be discussed and decisions and decision-makers have to demonstrate how they are serving the public good.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>As Norbert very importantly and correctly points out, one can absolutely not assume that all regulation and governance that is 'public' is in the public interest.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>APC has never stopped wanting the internet to be approached, understood and governed as a global public good. We still use this language - as we did last year in our NETmundial submission and in various other documents.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>What we have had to acknowledge is that for many people (including socialist economists) the concept of global public good does not apply to the internet for fairly technical reasons used by economists when defining public goods.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Our current 2013-16 strategy has exploring how the internet can be understood as public good-like entity as a priority. You might remember that about 5 years ago we asked IT for Change to write an issue paper on the internet as a global public good but you were too busy at the time.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>We have definitely not abandoned this concept. But we want to find ways of approaching it and explaining it that make sense to lawyers economists, activists, governments and users.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I personally believe very strongly that because the internet is a global public good its governance cannot just be left to governments - but that is a different discussion. That is why we explored the Aarhus Convention because we felt that mechanisms used for transparent public interest governance of natural resources can provide useful models for internet governance.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>There is good text in the WSIS documents and many of us have drawn on that good text. There is also some not so good text. This is true for the NETmundial statement as well.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>We should never retreat from good text. But we should also get some good principles and agreements adopted formally as principles for internet governance so that we can hold governments AND other actors accountable for applying them.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Anriette<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>On 26/02/2015 14:04, parminder wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> On Thursday 26 February 2015 03:02 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> Michael, many in CS have worked very hard for recognition that the <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> internet should be governed in the public interest. For many years.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> Getting that text into the NETmundial statement took work, but we got <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> it there and that is why I think it is short-sighted to dismiss that text.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Anriette, in my humble view this text about 'Internet being a global <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> resource that has to be managed in public interest' got in there <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> because people were haggling over terms like Internet as a pulbic <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> good, or a commons (which were indeed the politically meaningful <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> terms) , which was obviously resisted by the usual suspects, and <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> moving the words like resource and public around, the involved people <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> reached this somewhat meaningless phrase. I may be wrong, in which <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> case I am open to be corrected.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> In fact 'governing something in public interest' is a bit of oxymoron, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> because once a subject is recognised for public governance, as <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Internet was by WSIS, it is but obvious that it will be governed in <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> public interest (what else ?).<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Further, I am not aware of, as you say, the long struggles either of <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> general civil society or APC for a recognition that the Internet <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> should be governed in public interest - simply because it is kind of obvious .<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> Yes, APC was at one time very active to push the Internet as public <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> good agenda, although I have not heard of it in the last many years. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> We should not confuse 'public good' and 'governance in public <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> interest' , not that I am saying that you are confusing the two - just clarifying.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> It is a very important baseline from which we should never retreat <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> and on which we can build.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> For the above reason, I do not think of it at all as an important <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> baseline. Much much more progressive language is written in WSIS docs, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> starting with Geneva Declaration of Principles. especially rights <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> based language, and issues like access to knowledge... These concrete <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> principles was much more meaningful rather than just professing a <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> vague 'public interest'.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> But of course just my view...<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> parminder<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> <a href="http://netmundial.br/netmundial-multistakeholder-statement/"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://netmundial.br/netmundial-multistakeholder-statement/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> "NETmundial identified a set of common principles and important <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> values that contribute for an inclusive, multistakeholder, effective, <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> legitimate, and evolving Internet governance framework and recognized <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> that the Internet is a global resource which should be managed in the <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> public interest."<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> Anriette<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> On 26/02/2015 04:12, Michael Gurstein wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> Contrary to the position of so much of CS in IG, Mr. Obama appears <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> to be set on developing a regulatory framework for the US that <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> ensures that the Internet will operate in the public interest.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/technology/path-clears-for-net-ne<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> utrality-ahead-of-fcc-vote.html> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/technology/path-clears-for-net-neu"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/25/technology/path-clears-for-net-neu</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> trality-ahead-of-fcc-vote.html<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> M<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> ____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>governance@lists.igcaucus.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://www.igcaucus.org/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://translate.google.com/translate_t</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> ____________________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>governance@lists.igcaucus.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> To be removed from the list, visit:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> For all other list information and functions, see:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://www.igcaucus.org/</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://translate.google.com/translate_t</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> <o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>