[bestbits] Re: [governance] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014

[michael gurstein]

Good, I wonder if Graciela would be able/willing to do this?

Param, could you ask her do you think?

M

-----Original Message-----
From: Norbert Bollow [mailto:nb at bollow.ch] 
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 9:50 AM
To: Anja Kovacs
Cc: michael gurstein; &lt,bestbits at lists.bestbits.net&gt,
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Re: [governance] Rousseff & Chehade: Brazil will
host world event on Internet governance in 2014

In order to optimally influence the process, we should have the letter ready
early enough to already influence the meeting in which the members of the
Brazilian government delegation to the IGF are given their instructions by
their superiors. So that the letter will have the greatest possible impact
already on the discussions that will certainly take place alongside the IGC.

I think that we should go ahead at full steam with this.

Since Anja is unavailable to participate in this drafting work, I'd offer
myself to participate in this.

Still if possible it would be good to have in addition someone with a
developing country perspective already involved in the development of the
initial draft. Perhaps ideally someone from Brazil. I'll post on the IGC
list asking for a volunteer.

Greetings,
Norbert


Am Thu, 10 Oct 2013 21:49:31 +0530
schrieb Anja Kovacs <anja at internetdemocracy.in>:

> I unfortunately won't be able to work on this over the next few days, 
> but would be very happy to do so if people agree it can wait until 
> Bali. As I explained earlier, I in any case think that is a good idea, 
> as I believe that the letter really should include a CS agenda (or at 
> least an outline of such an agenda as well), and Bali will give us an 
> opportunity to really work on that. As Parminder also noted, the point 
> is to influence the process now that there still seems a chance of 
> doing so, not just to support it.
> 
> If others feel, however, that a letter should go out immediately and 
> would like to work on it, I would be very happy for them to go ahead.
> 
> Thanks and best,
> Anja
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10 October 2013 21:23, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > I'm not a great drafter of letters but I could work with someone
> > (Anja?) to try to get a draft out in the next few days.****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > N****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > *From:* bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:
> > bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] *On Behalf Of *parminder
> > *Sent:* Thursday, October 10, 2013 8:42 AM
> >
> > *To:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> > *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Re: [governance] Rousseff & Chehade:
> > Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > I agree about sending a letter of support. .
> > Especially since it could possibly push things along, in more 
> > positive directions.
> >
> > And since it is yet almost an unborn initiative, we could put in the 
> > stake  early.... Who knows in exchange for the legitimacy gained 
> > through civil society participation someone may even give us some 
> > elevated seats at the table... Brazil has often jumped to such 
> > partnership opportunity with civil society in other areas, and 
> > offered genuine partnerships.
> >
> > So, lets do it. Write to Brazil welcoming the initiative,  and so 
> > on.
> >
> > parminder****
> >
> > On Thursday 10 October 2013 08:36 PM, michael gurstein wrote:****
> >
> > I disagree and agree with Anja that a letter of support would be 
> > desireable.  I would be very surprised if our earlier letter of 
> > support for Dilma's speech at the UN was not communicated to her, 
> > perhaps even directly through one or another of our Brazilian 
> > colleagues or through those on her staff who are monitoring these 
> > activities; and who knows, perhaps even contributed to strengthening 
> > her (and Fadi's) resolve to take such a courageous and even 
> > audacious step.****
> >
> >  ****
> >
> > A letter of support could only reinforce her/their intentions in 
> > this matter and indicate that we (whoever exactly "we" are) as a CS 
> > group are in support of this development, intend to provide on-going 
> > support as it develops and further intend to actively contribute to 
> > its success through ensuring that the public interest of all, 
> > globally, are reflected in the Internet governance structure which 
> > hopefully will emerge.****
> >
> >  ****
> >
> > M ****
> >
> >  ****
> >
> > *From:* bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [ 
> > mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net<bestbits-request at lists.be
> > stbits.net>]
> > *On Behalf Of *matthew shears
> > *Sent:* Thursday, October 10, 2013 2:28 AM
> > *To:* bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
> > *Subject:* Re: [bestbits] Re: [governance] Rousseff & Chehade:
> > Brazil will host world event on Internet governance in 2014****
> >
> >  ****
> >
> > I agree that we need to approach this with some caution.  That said, 
> > we should start working on a CS agenda for this summit - its good 
> > for CS to communicate its expectations of such events early and we 
> > should start this process in Bali.  Less convinced about the need 
> > (or desirability) of writing letters of appreciation to all and 
> > sundry - we can always note our appreciation in the agenda we work 
> > up. ****
> >
> > On 10/10/2013 06:47, Anja Kovacs wrote:****
> >
> > I share Rafik's caution to some extent, but it is difficult not to 
> > be enthused by this proposal. As Mike points out, it is a tremendous 
> > opportunity for all of us to engage in this debate. Why don't we 
> > start working on another letter to Rousseff, in which we support the 
> > idea but also start outlining a CS agenda for the summit? What would 
> > we like to see such a summit achieving? Maybe we can use our 
> > discussions in Bali as a basis from which to start drafting such an
> > agenda.****
> >
> > And maybe time for a word of appreciation to Chehade as well, at 
> > least from those of us who believe that the internationalisation of 
> > ICANN would be a good thing :)****
> >
> > What do others think?****
> >
> > Best,
> > Anja****
> >
> > On Oct 10, 2013 7:57 AM, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org>
> > wrote:****
> >
> > On 10/10/13 06:33, John Curran wrote:****
> >
> > On Oct 9, 2013, at 3:02 PM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> <avri at acm.org> 
> > wrote:****
> >
> > Do I understand correctly: according to this the President of ICANN 
> > has just agreed with the need for external oversight of ICANN, and 
> > unnamed other organizations, involved in governance/management of 
> > the Internet, just as long as it is multistakeholder?****
> >
> > It appears to be a significant effort to address Internet Governance 
> > ****
> >
> > challenges, including acceleration of the globalization of ICANN 
> > towards ****
> >
> > an environment in which all stakeholders (including all
> > governments) can ****
> >
> > participate on an equal footing...****
> >
> >
> > It puts civil society to shame in how timid we, at large, have been 
> > in proposing similar advances on the status quo.  (I have not made 
> > much of a secret of the fact that I was disappointed in the number 
> > of endorsements that the Best Bits statement on enhanced cooperation 
> > ( http://bestbits.net/ec) received, though in part I accept that 
> > this was because the statement was simply too long.)
> >
> > This has also, in one stroke, determined the IGF's future.  Of 
> > course the writing has been on the wall for the IGF for a while now, 
> > but it has now officially become irrelevant in terms of its larger 
> > role in multi-stakeholder Internet governance as originally 
> > anticipated in the Tunis Agenda.  Of course it will continue to have 
> > a role as a discussion forum, but the momentum for it to fulfil a  
> > larger role has moved elsewhere.
> >
> > It also neutralises the effect of the old guard of the technical 
> > community (ISOC mainly) at the Working Group on Enhanced 
> > Cooperation.  Whilst they can still oppose meaningful implementation 
> > of enhanced cooperation reforms, this opposition is now utterly 
> > token and ineffectual.  With Brazil (and ICANN!) having lost 
> > patience and forging ahead regardless, this leaves anyone arguing 
> > against reforms at the WGEC looking silly and irrelevant. *
> > ***
> >
> > -- ****
> >
> > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm
> > Senior Policy Officer
> > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for
> > consumers* Office for Asia-Pacific and the Middle East Lot 5-1 Wisma 
> > WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
> > Tel: +60 3 7726 1599****
> >
> > Explore our new Resource Zone - the global consumer movement 
> > knowledge hub |
> > http://www.consumersinternational.org/news-and-media/resource-zone**
> > **
> >
> > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org |
> > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational****
> >
> > Read our email confidentiality
> > notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> > Don't print this email unless necessary.****
> >
> > *WARNING*: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly 
> > recommended to enable PGP or S/MIME encryption at your end. For 
> > instructions, see http://jere.my/l/8m.****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> > -- ****
> >
> >  ****
> >
> > Matthew Shears****
> >
> > Director and Representative****
> >
> > Global Internet Policy and Human Rights****
> >
> > Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT)****
> >
> > mshears at cdt.org****
> >
> > +44 (0) 771 247 2987****
> >
> > Skype: mshears****
> >
> > ** **
> >
> 
> 
>