[bestbits] Civil society response to NETmundial 2014 outcome text open for endorsement

Wed Apr 30 09:32:36 EDT 2014

Thank you c.a. I deeply agree with you and with your evaluation of the
political process.
A new statement will be inserted later today at the BB platform that I hope
mirrors the sentiment of many of us - who did not feel the statement done
by Niels was representative of our understanding of the results of NM.

On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:06 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Niels is from Article 19 -- their Brazilian chapter was involved in the
> campaign to ask for president Rousseff to veto an article, so it would go
> back to the Chamber of Deputies and would possibly never be approved. The
> curious thing (showing complete lack of political tactics) is that they
> wanted Dilma to announce she would veto the article *during NETmundial*.
>
> Can anyone imagine that Dilma, after the brutal political struggle to get
> MC approved by the Senate just in time for signing at NETmundial, would
> instead declare she would veto one article and blow up the tremendous
> political opportunity to sign a worldwide landmark document of principles?
>
> Also, Niels should describe more precisely who were signing the
> declaration.
>
> Finally, it is wrong to say (as they did) that net neutrality was not
> included in the NETmundial document. Unless they cannot understand English,
> this is the paragraph on it:
>
> "UNIFIED AND UNFRAGMENTED SPACE -- Internet should continue to be a
> globally coherent, interconnected, stable, unfragmented, scalable and
> accessible network-of-networks, based on a common set of unique identifiers
> and that allows data packets/information to flow freely end-to-end
> regardless of the lawful content."
>
> Since the term "net neutrality" was causing problems for
> consensus-building, that was what we (the executive committee) managed to
> do. It was also recognized that the issue is not simple and merits further
> discussion, as stated in the Roadmap document. But one cannot say it was
> not reasonably dealt with in the Principles document.
>
> Stephanie Perrin saved the [civil society's] day by following up with a
> very balanced and positive speech.
>
> frt rgds
>
> --c.a.
>
>
> On 04/30/2014 08:31 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2014, at 7:24 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>
>>  I haven't endorsed it either for the same reason.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Would have been nice to know who Niels was speaking for -- gave the
>> impression of civil society broadly.  Who asked for the opportunity to
>> speak and who did they say they represented?
>>
>> Adam
>>
>>
>>
>>  --
>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
>>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
>>> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly recommended
>>> to enable encryption at your end. For instructions, see
>>> http://jere.my/l/pgp.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 25 Apr 2014, at 7:20 am, Andrew Puddephatt <Andrew at gp-digital.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>  I think this is much too negative and fails to reflect the amount of
>>>> positive agenda and genuinely good things that came out of the whole
>>>> process.  I can’t support this statement
>>>>
>>>> Andrew Puddephatt
>>>> Global Partners Digital
>>>> Andrew at gp-digital.org
>>>> Tel mobile +44 (0)771 339 9597
>>>> Tel office   +44 (0)207 549 0350
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Jeremy Malcolm <Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au>
>>>> Reply-To: Jeremy Malcolm <Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au>
>>>> Date: Friday, 25 April 2014 01:44
>>>> To: "<bestbits at lists. net>" <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
>>>> Subject: [bestbits] Civil society response to NETmundial 2014 outcome
>>>> text open for endorsement
>>>>
>>>> The following initial response to the NETmundial 2014 outcome text was
>>>> agreed in the room at NETmundial by about 25 civil society representatives
>>>> and was read out in the session by Niels ten Oever from Article 19.  If you
>>>> are in agreement, please endorse and share:
>>>>
>>>> http://bestbits.net/netmundial-response
>>>>
>>>> This need not prevent the development of a more substantive civil
>>>> society response later.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com
>>>> Internet lawyer, ICT policy advocate, geek
>>>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
>>>>
>>>> WARNING: This email has not been encrypted. You are strongly
>>>> recommended to enable encryption at your end. For instructions, see
>>>> http://jere.my/l/pgp.
>>>>
>>>>  ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>>>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>>
>>
>>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>

-- 
*Carolina Rossini*
*Project Director, Latin America Resource Center*
Open Technology Institute
*New America Foundation*
//
http://carolinarossini.net/
+ 1 6176979389
*carolina.rossini at gmail.com*
skype: carolrossini
@carolinarossini
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140430/56be6a3a/attachment.htm>