notes from today

[Avri Doria]

A coupe of questions, 

-  ITU differentiates between 'open' meetings, e.g. plenaries, and 'private' meetings, e.g. working group meetings which are we asking for.
- when we say regulation of the Internet, what do we mean, physical layers, Internet layers, upper layers?

I don't understand the two conditionals under scope (with agreement?)

Andrew Puddephatt <Andrew at global-partners.co.uk> wrote:

>Here's the summary produced by Pranesh of our discussion. We'll revisit
>this tomorrow – sectios in [] are under consideration
>
>"[* There are many legitimate concerns that governments have, but ... ]
>
>We are compelled to point out that the process of the revision of the
>ITRs have not been sufficiently inclusive and transparent, in spite of
>the the ITU Secretariat's [efforts/claims/efforts and claims] of
>transparency]
>
>## Process of WCIT
>
>Member-states, in most cases, have not held open, broad-based, public
>consultations.  In order to address this deficiency, as a minimum, we
>would urge:
>
>* All member states to make their proposals available to the public.
>* The ITU Secretariat, to take as one step in increasing transparency
>of the WCIT will be to have a live webcast with the video, audio, and
>text transcripts, as far as possible, to enable participation by all,
>including persons with disabilities.
>* All member states to support proposals to open sessions of the the
>WCIT meeting to the public.
>* The ITU Secretariat and member-states to make as much documentation
>publicly available as possible on the ITU's website, so that civil
>society will provide substantive input on member-states' proposals as
>they are made available.
>* Member-states [to encourage civil society participation and] increase
>the involvement of civil society in their national delegations.
>* The ITU to create spaces during the WCIT for civil society to express
>their views as was done during the WSIS process.
>
>====
>
>## Scope of the ITR
>* International regulation is required around technical issue limited
>to telecommunications networks and interoperability standards.
>[* The International Telecommunications Regulations should in no way
>involve regulation of the Internet.]
>[* The ITU should not adopt any regulations that would preclude any
>language that would limit 'net neutrality' principles.]
>* If it could have a negative impact on evolution of multistakeholder
>Internet governance arrangements.
>* If it could have a negative impact on the public's rights to privacy
>and freedom of expression and access.
>
>====
>
>* Scope of the ITR (lack of agreement)
>* [Recognized operating agencies, and not other organizations and
>persons.]
>* [The ITRs should be dedicated to the physical infrastructure layer
>and not the logical infrastructure and not processing of the signals
>and intelligence that travel over the physical infrastructure layer.]
>
>See you tomorrow at 9
>Andrew Puddephatt, Director          Global Partners and Associates
>Development House, 56-64 Leonard St, EC2A 4LT, UK
>Office 44 (0)207 549 0350
>Mobile: +44 (0)771 339 9597
>andrew at global-partners.co.uk<mailto:andrew at global-partners.co.uk>      
>           www.global-partners.co.uk<http://www.global-partners.co.uk/>

Avri Doria
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20121104/19306a19/attachment.htm>