[bestbits] FW: BB/ Brazil summit input - expression of interest

[Andrew Puddephatt]

Not sure I understand – I’m not suggesting we take any particular approach to internationalising ICANN, just start by looking at all the proposals on the table.  Maybe I expressed myself badly.

All I’m trying to do is start the work off in a constructive fashion.  I think you/anyone else should feel free to frame things anyway you want.

I’ll collect the responses to the survey I sent round and hopefully that will suggest the different areas of interest we have and who might want to work with whom. But that’s only my suggestion.  “Let a hundred flowers bloom.”


Andrew Puddephatt | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
Executive Director
Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT
T: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 | M: +44 (0)771 339 9597 | Skype: andrewpuddephatt
gp-digital.org

From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of parminder
Sent: 30 November 2013 05:29
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
Subject: Re: [bestbits] FW: BB/ Brazil summit input - expression of interest


On Saturday 30 November 2013 10:56 AM, parminder wrote:

On Tuesday 26 November 2013 11:23 PM, Andrew Puddephatt wrote:
Following up on my e-mail re inputs to Brazil conference.

To remind everyone: Although the details are not clear, it looks like there are three broad areas within which it would be useful for CS groups (and others)  to make pro-active submissions to the Brazil meeting. These are:
AREA 1 - Recommendations on process issues for the conference (remote participation, stakeholder representation and selection)
AREA 2 - Substantive input into their work to develop universal Internet principles (likely to cover the areas sketched out by President Rousseff in her speech to the UNGA).
AREA 3 - Substantive input on an institutional framework for multistakeholder Internet governance including:

1.      Internationalisation of ICANN (based on existing work done by Internet Governance Project and/or others).

Andrew,

Why should a proposal that advocates continued existence of ICANN as an UN organisation

sorry, US organisation

under US law be posited as a prime example of an 'internationalisation model' , especially when we are here as a global group... Cant we do with a more neutral framing? Dont know if anyone is coordinating this line/ sub-area, but I am happy to do so..



2.      Orphan issues (based on existing proposals put before the WGEC and the recommendations of the Correspondence Group).

Had requested that this be called as 'Internet related public policy issues' which is a proper description and also the WGIG and Tunis agenda terms..

parminder



We have produced a chart mapping those who have expressed an interest in each of the areas below. There could feasibly be a number of different civil society submissions on each of these areas.
Given the short timeframes, and the fact that there does not seem to be consensus among all of us on a number of these issues, I think the best way forward is for anyone who wants to lead on a particular submission to let the list know, gather together people who also want to work on that submission, develop something as a smaller group and then share it back with the platform. Obviously, ideally submissions would be able to gather broad agreement among BB participants, but consensus may be too high a bar at this stage.
For my part, I am interested in two specific inputs:

A submission on reforming internet governance that keep the dispersed structure and multi-stakeholder participation (elements of which are likely to include ideas on internationalising ICANN and strengthening the IGF)

A submission on the first high level principle dealing with free expression, privacy etc.  Note that I’m concerned that privacy protections, if badly expressed, could restrict freedom of expression unduly so I’ll be looking to assert ICCPR standards on free expression.
Not everyone will agree with that take on things and I assume there are many other issues to focus on so at this stage I’d like to know who would want to work with me on these two specific topics.
I would encourage others to set out their own area of interest and seek collaborators.  As we will probably need to submit our views to Brazil and/or other organisers by March 1, 2014 I’d suggest we should aim to produce documents for endorsement/support by other groups on the BB platform by mid-February



Stream 1

Stream 2

Stream 3



Recommendation on process issues for the conference (remote participation, stakeholder representation and selection)

Substantive input on universal Internet principles (based on Marco Civil and/or other existing principles documents).

Substantive input on an institutional framework for multistakeholder Internet governance including: 1. Internationalisation of ICANN (based on existing work done by Internet Governance Project and/or others). 2. Orphan issues (based on existing proposals put before the WGEC and the recommendations of the Correspondence Group).

Andrew



Submission on the first high level principle dealing with free expression, privacy etc. > asserting ICCPR standards on free expression.

Submission on reforming internet governance that keep the dispersed structure and multi-stakeholder participation (which is likely to include ideas on internationalising ICANN and strengthening the IGF)

Matthew



x



Nnenna

x





Claudio



x - contribute, not lead



Valeria/ APC



x - contribute

x - contribute

Marianne/ IRP



x



Jeanette





x - listen and comment

M. Gurstein



x

x

Marilia/ Joana





3.1/3.2

Pranesh



x

x

Parminder

x

x

x





Andrew Puddephatt | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
Executive Director
Development House, 56–64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT
T: +44 (0)20 7549 0336 | M: +44 (0)771 339 9597 | Skype: andrewpuddephatt
gp-digital.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131202/484659a2/attachment.htm>