[bestbits] Outcome of cyberspace conference in Seoul

Wed Oct 9 11:05:13 EDT 2013

I think it is well to recognize that the OECD as an organization is
primarily "research" focused. What that means is that a lot of their
activities/outputs are framed as "value-free" research results. The problem
with that however, is that the way in which the research is framed is almost
inevitably directed towards achieving the rather specific policy outcome
which is being pursued.

The major challenge for CS in it's involvement with the OECD is that not
only must it have the means to challenge the policy outcomes, but more
importantly it needs to have the financial/intellectual resources to
challenge the research that supports those outcomes upstream and even more
important (and even more difficult) to challenge the way in which the
research is being framed (conceptualization, terminology, methodology etc.)
upstream which is generally at a very technical and "professional" level
(think professional statisticians, gerontologists, macro-economists etc.etc.

Since CS at the OECD has effectively no resources to support its activities
(as compared to the Secretariat which has core government funding and the
other "stakeholders" such as the corporate sector which has corporate
funding the whole process is more or less completely skewed.

(And of course, even with all the above, CS is at a further disadvantage
given that the way the OECD defines its mandate is (more or less narrowly)
related to "economic" development. Thus, as soon as CS starts moving into
areas that make some governments uncomfortable (social servicing for social
good rather than economic i.e. market development for example) that mandate
is more or less immediately invoked and further discussion in those
directions is curtailed.

M

From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
[mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of parminder
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2013 7:00 AM
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Outcome of cyberspace conference in Seoul

Chile too now is an OECD member.....

On the larger issue, I am rather surprised and disappointed at the robust
support from developing country people of the OECD 'global' Internet policy
making model - both the process and substance of which being hugely
problematic.... I dont have the time right now to engage into a discussion,
but could not resist expressing my strong feeling in general about the
issue...

Democracy is in itself important, it is not a
if-we-disregard-the-process-issue thing..... And BTW, when it comes to
multistakeholderism, the same
lets-for-the-moment-disregard-the-process-issue proposition never seems not
to apply. Is multistakeholderism then a higher value than democracy?

OECD is a centre price of 'global' Internet policy making today, which is
then exported through one to one or plurilateral deals to developing
countries... It is  a fact that many developing countries fall prey to this
unprincipled approach on narrow short term self interest consideration....
And playing developing countires against one another through such short term
deals is  a major US/ OECD method of spreading their regime globally. This
is a major axis of global digital domination.. Civil society interested in
democratic values should simply and roundly criticise such models of global
policy making. That is the only basic attitude that can be taken towards
them. 

The developing countries who have signed some of the mentioned OECD
documents, are never a part of the core discussions, agenda framing and
final formulation -- and so to pass off their sign on as a measure of they
being a part of the process is a very undemocratic take..... Rest later....
parmidner 

On Wednesday 09 October 2013 07:14 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:

To add some more "spice": both Chile and Mexico are still developing
countries (may be listed as "emerging countries" in some circles), and
while Chile is not in the OECD, Mexico is.

--c.a.

On 10/08/2013 11:47 AM, michael gurstein wrote:

Pranesh,

You are providing a very peculiar list of "developing" countries--"Chile,
Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Latvia, Mexico, Poland, Senegal, Turkey".

Of which three belong to the EU (Hungary, Latvia, Poland), one is a very
strong aspirant to the EU (Turkey), and two others are very strong aspirants
(based on income) to the OECD (Chile and Mexico)...

By my, and I believe most reckonings there are 3 actual DC's in your list
(from some 130?? or so)--India, Indonesia, and Senegal--hardly a sufficient
number to be drawing any useful conclusions from.

M

-----Original Message-----
From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
[mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Pranesh Prakash
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 10:04 PM
To: Jeremy Malcolm; bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Outcome of cyberspace conference in Seoul

A top note that the OECD principles are actually
OECD+Egypt+Business+Tech principles, which CISAC helped shape but didn't
sign on to.  Rest inline:

Jeremy Malcolm [2013-10-08 00:04]:

On 08/10/13 09:21, Pranesh Prakash wrote:

Focussing on the policymaking principles outlined in the OECD communiqu:
apart from process related issues of lack of representation of 
developing world governments, in terms of substance how would a 
statement of principles that had developing world participation look 
different?

There is only one way to find out, and that is to deal with the 
process related issues.  But for a rough idea, we can look at the 
Brazilian Principles for the Governance and Use of the Internet.  
Notable additions compared to the OECD principles:

  * *Universality:* Internet access must be universal so that it becomes
    a tool for human and social development, thereby contributing to the
    formation of an inclusive and nondiscriminatory society, for the
    benefit of all
  * *Standardization and interoperability:* The Internet must be based
    on open standards that facilitate interoperability and enable all to
    participate in its development

On standards, the OECD principles (under "Promote the open, distributed and
interconnected nature of the Internet") states:

"The Internet's openness also stems from globally accepted, consensus driven
technical standards that support global product markets and communications.
The roles, openness, and competencies of the global multi-stakeholder
institutions that govern standards for different layers of Internet
components should be recognised and their contribution should be sought on
the different technical elements of public policy objectives."

  * *Neutrality of the network:* Filtering or traffic privileges must
    meet ethical and technical criteria only, excluding any political,
    commercial, religious and cultural factors or any other form of
    discrimination or preferential treatment

"Maintaining technology neutrality and appropriate quality for all Internet
services is also important to ensure an open and dynamic Internet
environment. Provision of open Internet access services is critical for the
Internet economy."

and notable omissions:

  * Promote investment and competition in high speed networks and

services;

  * Promote and enable the cross-border delivery of services;
  * Foster voluntarily developed codes of conduct;
  * Maximise individual empowerment;
  * Give appropriate priority to enforcement efforts.

More could be written about this, but there is a very different 
emphasis with the OECD principles much more individualistic and biased 
towards trade, than the Brazilian principles.

OECD is primarily about economic/trade issues (though not solely about such
issues), so that bias is perhaps to be expected.  In the 2008 Seoul
Declaration for the Future of the Internet Economy, there were 10 developing
countries (Chile, Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Latvia, Mexico, Poland,
Senegal, Turkey) represented in the 39 individual countries that signed the
declaration. Sure, the developing countries were outnumbered 3:1, but they
still agreed to:

* Ensure respect for intellectual property rights.
* Create a market-friendly environment for convergence that encourages
infrastructure investment, higher levels of connectivity and innovative
services and applications.
* Promote Internet-based innovation, competition, and user choice.
* Acting as a key driver for the creation of enterprises and communities and
stimulating closer global co-operation.
* Promote the secure and responsible use of the Internet that respects
international social and ethical norms and that increases transparency and
accountability.
* Establish a regulatory environment that assures a level playing field for
competition.
* Stimulate investment and competition in the development of high capacity
information and communication infrastructures and the delivery of
Internet-enabled services within and across borders.
* Maintain an open environment that supports the free flow of information,
research, innovation, entrepreneurship and business transformation.
* Combine efforts to combat digital piracy with innovative approaches which
provide creators and rights holders with incentives to create and
disseminate works in a manner that is beneficial to creators, users and our
economies as a whole.
* Increase cross-border co-operation of governments and enforcement
authorities in the areas of improving cyber-security, combating spam, as
well as protecting privacy, consumers and minors.
* Empowering consumers and users in online transactions and exchanges.

Most (all?) of the things that you'd think developing countries would omit
were accepted by 10 of them.  Just sayin'.

Cheers,
Pranesh

--
Pranesh Prakash
Policy Director
Centre for Internet and Society
T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter:
@pranesh_prakash
-------------------+
Postgraduate Associate & Access to Knowledge Fellow Information Society
Project, Yale Law School
T: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20131009/b3dc8d64/attachment.htm>