From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct  3 04:38:24 2016
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 10:38:24 +0200
Subject: [bestbits] Internet policies and e-commerce at the WTO-useful
 resources
Message-ID: <CACpVkK2QHfrxa3NtvAJF35WzLoPj0eECxPDumfJiC9mdHZnMUA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Last week the WTO Public Forum took place in Geneva. Special attention was
given to the digital economy and e-commerce discussions: a large number of
sessions were dedicated to them. It is worth to pay attention to several
digital policy topics which are being framed as trade issues and included
on the agenda of the WTO, such as network neutrality, data localisation and
encryption. An analysis of this trend is available on this blog post
<http://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/e-commerce-wto-next-arena-internet-policy-discussions>
.

Participation on the Forum was limited to a first come first served basis.
The Geneva Internet Platform and DiploFoundation have conducted a *just-in-time
reporting* from all sessions that presented a digital component. These
resources provide a valuable overview of the current state of discussions.
All reports are available here:
http://digitalwatch.giplatform.org/events/wto-public-forum

A mapping of national initiatives to regulate e-commerce across the world
<http://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/rise-e-commerce-initiatives-expanding-access-taxation>
and in Europe
<http://www.diplomacy.edu/blog/e-commerce-europe-consultations-court-rulings-and-other-updates-september>
can also be found online.

This and other developments can be found in the 14th issue of the *Geneva
Digital Watch* newsletter, published today:
http://digitalwatch.giplatform.org/newsletter

All the best wishes,
Marilia

-- 

*Marília Maciel*
Digital Policy Senior Researcher, DiploFoundation
WMO Building *|* 7bis, Avenue de la Paix *| *1211 Geneva - Switzerland
*Tel *+41 (0) 22 9073632 *| *
*Email*: *MariliaM at diplomacy.edu <mariliam at diplomacy.edu>* *|** Twitter: *
*@MariliaM*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161003/24ae83a6/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 10:44:50 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Sat, 08 Oct 2016 14:44:50 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
In-Reply-To:  <CAAU+vPGPByfKVKhgq1i2K5HVnxLLw8U=y0EnvFv=PdEraFTO4A@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAK78muR9+Ub==91Z-er7C9XFVP2wLMgywpE1KUQokstm30CYvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAU+vPGPByfKVKhgq1i2K5HVnxLLw8U=y0EnvFv=PdEraFTO4A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6e7adddd-572d-2291-e48e-1e46d4c9af5b@mixmax.com>

Dear Sheetal
Thank you for the messageCongratulations to Analia and Richard
Do we get to know who were the other candidates?
Thanks
Renata
 





On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 4:45 PM, Wisdom Donkor wisdom.dk at gmail.com
wrote:
Amalia and Richard, congratulations to you.
Kindly let us no where the party is taken place.
Cheers

On Friday, October 7, 2016, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
Dear all,

We are writing to let you know of the outcome of the election for CSCG chairs.

With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG), which works
to ensure a co-ordinated civil society response and conduit when it comes to
making civil society appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new
chairpersons team: Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected
unanimously, and they will serve as equal Co-chairs.

This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair of CSCG,
as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for serving another
term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his skillful leadership over the
past years.

Any questions do let us know! 

Best,
Sheetal & Poncelet 
-- 
Sheetal KumarProgramme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITALSecond Home, 68-80
Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JLT: +44 (0)20  3 818 3258  0337| M: +44
(0)7739569514  |

-- 
WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)
E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist
National Information Technology Agency (NITA)/Ghana Open Data Initiative
Project.ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,Freedom Online
Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation Member,OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN
Memember, ITAG Member
Email:wisdom_dk at hotmail.com
wisdom.donkor at data.gov.gh
wisdom.dk at gmail.com
Skype: wisdom_dkfacebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
Website:www.nita.gov.gh /www.data.gov.gh
www.isoc.gh /www.itag.org.gh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161008/5db227d9/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 12:44:44 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 13:44:44 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] Attempt to block Facebook in Brazil
Message-ID: <CAMokdMxAYfY38u+SGfSqgU60JU+=6HRbNcH6ZY-06qKxN_X23A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

One of the strange Mondays in Brazil again.
Today a judge ordered a block in Facebook throughout Brazil due to a
political satire page.
Facebook removed the page and the blockage ended up not really happening.
However, next steps remain undetermined.
Sorry, the news is in Portuguese.
http://olhardigital.uol.com.br/noticia/juiz-manda-bloquear-facebook-em-todo-o-brasil-por-24-horas/62909

Best,

Renata

From kawsu.sillah at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 15:13:26 2016
From: kawsu.sillah at gmail.com (Kawsu Sillah)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 19:13:26 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] Youth at AfIGF
Message-ID: <CAH6w8W6vCcAiq1=Q2AuUJO2JMxeqRSOJYKH2C5V4XxVCx_y+7Q@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Colleagues,

Greetings. Hope you are doing very well.

As you maybe aware, the 5th African Internet Governance Forum
<http://afigf.org/> (AfIGF) is scheduled for 16-18 October, 2016 in Durban,
South Africa.

Considering the importance of youth's involvement and leadership in IGF
spaces, the secretariat of AfIGF has this year specifically allocated two
activities for the youth. One is a parallel workshop dubbed "Youth and
Internet Governance" to be held on October 16, from 2.30 to 4.30pm and the
other one is a plenary session on "Youth Entrepreneurship and Innovation":
Accelerating the Digital Transformation of Africa, to be held on October
18, from 9:00 to 10:15am. This session we are told will be
moderated/chaired by the Under Secretary for Communication at the Ministry
of Communications of Egypt.

Currently, there is a team working with the Secretariat on the programme
for the day.

Against this backdrop, I am reaching out with an invitation to the fellow
youth from various listservs, especially, those that are planning to
participate
at the forum in Durban and also to inquire about you participating in any
of the sessions either as a speaker, moderator or rapporteur.

Please respond asap to confirm your availability and I will share more
details. In your reply, be kind to keep my colleagues on copy.

Look forward to having you in Durban.

Kind regards,

Kawsu.

--Team member Youth @ AfIGF 2016--

-- 
Best Regards,


[image: --]
Kawsu Sillah
[image: https://]about.me/ksillah
<https://about.me/ksillah?promo=email_sig>
AMBASSADOR <https://ideas.itu.int/page/view/933> ITU Telecom World Young
Innovators Competition.

Mobile : +220 9865300 |  6865300 | 3965300
Skype: profkawsu   |  Facebook: Kawsu.f.Sillah
<https://www.facebook.com/kawsu.f.sillah>
Twitter: @ksillah1  | LinkedIn: KAWSU SILLAH
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=103784437&trk=nav_responsive_tab_profile_pic>

*‘Every single person must have access to a computer, must understand it,
must have access to good software and good teachers and to the Internet, so
that every person will have the opportunity to make the most of his or her
own life’ – Bill Clinton, the former US President.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161010/15fa0fad/attachment.htm>

From carolina.rossini at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 11:14:10 2016
From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:14:10 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Attempt to block Facebook in Brazil
In-Reply-To: <CAMokdMxAYfY38u+SGfSqgU60JU+=6HRbNcH6ZY-06qKxN_X23A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMokdMxAYfY38u+SGfSqgU60JU+=6HRbNcH6ZY-06qKxN_X23A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK-FJAdUnwT1ZScbG3qjWC5+51+rFq+V0HNPTvQo+QNCdL82+Q@mail.gmail.com>

note that this is related to Brazilian Elections Regulations, which are
very very innapropriate for the digital age and FoE, not Marco Civil

On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi
>
> One of the strange Mondays in Brazil again.
> Today a judge ordered a block in Facebook throughout Brazil due to a
> political satire page.
> Facebook removed the page and the blockage ended up not really happening.
> However, next steps remain undetermined.
> Sorry, the news is in Portuguese.
> http://olhardigital.uol.com.br/noticia/juiz-manda-
> bloquear-facebook-em-todo-o-brasil-por-24-horas/62909
>
> Best,
>
> Renata
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 *
Vice President, International Policy and Strategy
+ 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
*PublicKnowledge* | @publicknowledge <https://twitter.com/publicknowledge>
 | www.publicknowledge.org
1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161011/d834b12b/attachment.htm>

From carolina.rossini at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 12:02:19 2016
From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:02:19 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Attempt to block Facebook in Brazil
In-Reply-To: <57FD061B.5060704@gmail.com>
References: <CAMokdMxAYfY38u+SGfSqgU60JU+=6HRbNcH6ZY-06qKxN_X23A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK-FJAdUnwT1ZScbG3qjWC5+51+rFq+V0HNPTvQo+QNCdL82+Q@mail.gmail.com> <57FD061B.5060704@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK-FJAe4TN=9CwGpT5dFrWqP2nJQ30waViMvnuEd8HkaLd6dPA@mail.gmail.com>

Renata might be able to help you sooner. I am in a tight schedule today.

On Tuesday, October 11, 2016, Ellery Biddle <ellerygv at gmail.com> wrote:

> We are working on an item about this for Global Voices. Carolina, could
> you explain or point us to an explanation of the election regs as they
> relate to MC?
>
> Carolina Rossini wrote:
> > note that this is related to Brazilian Elections Regulations, which are
> > very very innapropriate for the digital age and FoE, not Marco Civil
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <
> raquino at gmail.com <javascript:;>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi
> >>
> >> One of the strange Mondays in Brazil again.
> >> Today a judge ordered a block in Facebook throughout Brazil due to a
> >> political satire page.
> >> Facebook removed the page and the blockage ended up not really
> happening.
> >> However, next steps remain undetermined.
> >> Sorry, the news is in Portuguese.
> >> http://olhardigital.uol.com.br/noticia/juiz-manda-
> >> bloquear-facebook-em-todo-o-brasil-por-24-horas/62909
> >>
> >> Best,
> >>
> >> Renata
> >>
> >> ____________________________________________________________
> >> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net <javascript:;>.
> >> 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 <javascript:;>.
> > To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
> >      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
> --
> Ellery Roberts Biddle
> Global Voices, Advocacy Director
> @ellerybiddle
>
>

-- 

# # #
# • #
# # #
*Carolina Rossini *
Vice President, International Policy and Strategy
+ 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
*PublicKnowledge* | @publicknowledge <https://twitter.com/publicknowledge>
 | www.publicknowledge.org
1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161011/5b02ef95/attachment.htm>

From sheetal at gp-digital.org  Wed Oct 12 05:00:02 2016
From: sheetal at gp-digital.org (Sheetal Kumar)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 10:00:02 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
In-Reply-To: <6e7adddd-572d-2291-e48e-1e46d4c9af5b@mixmax.com>
References: <CAK78muR9+Ub==91Z-er7C9XFVP2wLMgywpE1KUQokstm30CYvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAU+vPGPByfKVKhgq1i2K5HVnxLLw8U=y0EnvFv=PdEraFTO4A@mail.gmail.com> <6e7adddd-572d-2291-e48e-1e46d4c9af5b@mixmax.com>
Message-ID: <CAK78muSmEOs9MesNaaNBXY6tJbgYiBr9XAYW+trXPo6JkKFTww@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Renata,

As far as I am aware, there were no other candidates - however, in the end
both were unanimously supported by CSCG reps for the position of co-chairs.

Best,
Sheetal.

On 8 October 2016 at 15:44, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Sheetal
>
> Thank you for the message
> Congratulations to Analia and Richard
>
> Do we get to know who were the other candidates?
>
> Thanks
>
> Renata
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 4:45 PM, Wisdom Donkor wisdom.dk at gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Amalia and Richard, congratulations to you.
>>
>> Kindly let us no where the party is taken place.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On Friday, October 7, 2016, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> We are writing to let you know of the outcome of the election for CSCG
>> chairs <http://internetgov-cs.org/procedures>.
>>
>> With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG
>> <http://internetgov-cs.org/>), which works to ensure a co-ordinated
>> civil society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society
>> appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new chairpersons team:
>> Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected unanimously, and they
>> will serve as equal Co-chairs.
>>
>> This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair of
>> CSCG, as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for serving
>> another term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his skillful leadership
>> over the past years.
>>
>> Any questions do let us know!
>>
>> Best,
>> Sheetal & Poncelet
>> --
>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>> Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)*
>> E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist
>> National Information Technology Agency (NITA)/
>> Ghana Open Data Initiative Project.
>> ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,
>> Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation Member,
>> OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN Memember, ITAG Member
>> Email: wisdom_dk at hotmail.com
>> wisdom.donkor at data.gov.gh
>> wisdom.dk at gmail.com
>> Skype: wisdom_dk
>> facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
>> Website: www.nita.gov.gh / www.data.gov.gh
>> www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh
>>
>>


-- 


*Sheetal Kumar*
Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161012/cc37704b/attachment.htm>

From jmalcolm at eff.org  Wed Oct 12 14:54:45 2016
From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 11:54:45 -0700
Subject: [bestbits] NGO statement to the UNGA First Committee on cyberspace
 and human security available for endorsement
Message-ID: <d7161899-a619-dbeb-f0af-738a566249a5@eff.org>

We have here another not very timely opportunity for endorsement of a
statement on cybersecurity:

http://bestbits.net/unga-cyberspace-2016/

The statement was shopped around only in the last two days to a smaller
group of peace and IG groups and academics and has been finalised
already for presentation at the UNGA.  I've asked the organizer if he
can give some more notice next time, so that there is a better
opportunity for people to give input.

Here is an excerpt that I think many of us can agree with:

    Treating cyber primarily as a military and security issue risks
    institutionalising the broad idea of cyber conflict. This may lead
    to preparations that escalate the threat, and responses that
    unnecessarily escalate incidents, including misunderstandings, into
    armed conflict. It also risks adopting a framework that is more
    permissive of harm to the population than international human rights
    law allows. In working to prevent cyber attacks, states should
    consider the full range of impacts on human rights, international
    humanitarian law, protection of civilians and state responsibility.
    In approaching these issues, it is therefore important to be wary of
    overinflating the threat, and in doing so promoting militarisation
    and escalation. We should remember that the Internet is essentially
    civilian infrastructure and should not be made the target of or the
    medium for attacks.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161012/5f25c688/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161012/5f25c688/attachment.sig>

From raquino at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 19:45:39 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 20:45:39 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] NGO statement to the UNGA First Committee on
 cyberspace and human security available for endorsement
In-Reply-To: <d7161899-a619-dbeb-f0af-738a566249a5@eff.org>
References: <d7161899-a619-dbeb-f0af-738a566249a5@eff.org>
Message-ID: <CAMokdMwH6sLCpJnbsDtjTfMtrKbg5TzQMn9vo3SbJPcrmP764w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

Thanks for bringing this, Jeremy.
It seems to me that civil society finds increasingly a challenge to
keep with cybersecurity issues so I've endorsed this with wished NGOs
get involved in these debates.

Best,

Renata

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> We have here another not very timely opportunity for endorsement of a
> statement on cybersecurity:
>
> http://bestbits.net/unga-cyberspace-2016/
>
> The statement was shopped around only in the last two days to a smaller
> group of peace and IG groups and academics and has been finalised already
> for presentation at the UNGA.  I've asked the organizer if he can give some
> more notice next time, so that there is a better opportunity for people to
> give input.
>
> Here is an excerpt that I think many of us can agree with:
>
> Treating cyber primarily as a military and security issue risks
> institutionalising the broad idea of cyber conflict. This may lead to
> preparations that escalate the threat, and responses that unnecessarily
> escalate incidents, including misunderstandings, into armed conflict. It
> also risks adopting a framework that is more permissive of harm to the
> population than international human rights law allows. In working to prevent
> cyber attacks, states should consider the full range of impacts on human
> rights, international humanitarian law, protection of civilians and state
> responsibility. In approaching these issues, it is therefore important to be
> wary of overinflating the threat, and in doing so promoting militarisation
> and escalation. We should remember that the Internet is essentially civilian
> infrastructure and should not be made the target of or the medium for
> attacks.
>
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
> PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

From louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 21:22:03 2016
From: louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com (Louise Marie Hurel)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 22:22:03 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] NGO statement to the UNGA First Committee on
 cyberspace and human security available for endorsement
In-Reply-To: <CAMokdMwH6sLCpJnbsDtjTfMtrKbg5TzQMn9vo3SbJPcrmP764w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d7161899-a619-dbeb-f0af-738a566249a5@eff.org> <CAMokdMwH6sLCpJnbsDtjTfMtrKbg5TzQMn9vo3SbJPcrmP764w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+Ks+ACC3KePq64MbJdKpCr1TpqA9yPaeshcYQ7YaH7cksAP7Q@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jeremy,

Great initiative! Thanks for sharing it!
Working on how to guarantee greater participation and inclusion within
processes that carry a heavily over-politicised/militarised/securitised
notion of cybersecurity is a fundamental step towards building bridges
between actors and reshaping cybersecurity through human rights
perspectives.

Best,

2016-10-12 20:45 GMT-03:00 Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>:

> Hi
>
> Thanks for bringing this, Jeremy.
> It seems to me that civil society finds increasingly a challenge to
> keep with cybersecurity issues so I've endorsed this with wished NGOs
> get involved in these debates.
>
> Best,
>
> Renata
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
> > We have here another not very timely opportunity for endorsement of a
> > statement on cybersecurity:
> >
> > http://bestbits.net/unga-cyberspace-2016/
> >
> > The statement was shopped around only in the last two days to a smaller
> > group of peace and IG groups and academics and has been finalised already
> > for presentation at the UNGA.  I've asked the organizer if he can give
> some
> > more notice next time, so that there is a better opportunity for people
> to
> > give input.
> >
> > Here is an excerpt that I think many of us can agree with:
> >
> > Treating cyber primarily as a military and security issue risks
> > institutionalising the broad idea of cyber conflict. This may lead to
> > preparations that escalate the threat, and responses that unnecessarily
> > escalate incidents, including misunderstandings, into armed conflict. It
> > also risks adopting a framework that is more permissive of harm to the
> > population than international human rights law allows. In working to
> prevent
> > cyber attacks, states should consider the full range of impacts on human
> > rights, international humanitarian law, protection of civilians and state
> > responsibility. In approaching these issues, it is therefore important
> to be
> > wary of overinflating the threat, and in doing so promoting
> militarisation
> > and escalation. We should remember that the Internet is essentially
> civilian
> > infrastructure and should not be made the target of or the medium for
> > attacks.
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy Malcolm
> > Senior Global Policy Analyst
> > Electronic Frontier Foundation
> > https://eff.org
> > jmalcolm at eff.org
> >
> > Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
> >
> > :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
> >
> > Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
> > PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>



-- 
*LOUISE MARIE HUREL*
*RESEARCHER / PESQUISADORA*
louise.marie.hsd at gmail.com
*Skype: louise.dias*

*FGV DIREITO RIO **::* Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade

Center for Technology and Society at Getúlio Vargas Foundation

*ESCOLA DE GUERRA NAVAL ::* Núcleo de Análise e Conjuntura/Geocorrente
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161012/9f509009/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 22:02:21 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 23:02:21 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] Attempt to block Facebook in Brazil
In-Reply-To: <CAK-FJAe4TN=9CwGpT5dFrWqP2nJQ30waViMvnuEd8HkaLd6dPA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMokdMxAYfY38u+SGfSqgU60JU+=6HRbNcH6ZY-06qKxN_X23A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK-FJAdUnwT1ZScbG3qjWC5+51+rFq+V0HNPTvQo+QNCdL82+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <57FD061B.5060704@gmail.com> <CAK-FJAe4TN=9CwGpT5dFrWqP2nJQ30waViMvnuEd8HkaLd6dPA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMokdMyszMT0945cJVwHR7o0z3w-9AFNonCwrKqLx-Hs6av2mQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

Yes! Brazil +100yo election day law is an interesting one!
Nobody can be arrested on election day for most common crimes, aggressive
campaigning means jail time and, last but not least, FoE becomes quite an
"interpretative" area.

Alas, best source to understand our complicated election laws are the folks
from the institutes researching democracy and technology. Here they are
copied.

Suffice to say that, despite all the legal pressure, Facebook is a major
advertising area for most retail in Brazil and crisis being what it is, not
even 5min Facebook was offline. Of course there was expendiency in removing
the political satire page but one can only wonder how much pressure do such
"out of the blue" blockage court orders really have in a country who is
listening far more to economic powers than to Marco Civil these days.

Best,

Renata


On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Carolina Rossini <
carolina.rossini at gmail.com> wrote:

> Renata might be able to help you sooner. I am in a tight schedule today.
>
>
> On Tuesday, October 11, 2016, Ellery Biddle <ellerygv at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We are working on an item about this for Global Voices. Carolina, could
>> you explain or point us to an explanation of the election regs as they
>> relate to MC?
>>
>> Carolina Rossini wrote:
>> > note that this is related to Brazilian Elections Regulations, which are
>> > very very innapropriate for the digital age and FoE, not Marco Civil
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 12:44 PM, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <
>> raquino at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi
>> >>
>> >> One of the strange Mondays in Brazil again.
>> >> Today a judge ordered a block in Facebook throughout Brazil due to a
>> >> political satire page.
>> >> Facebook removed the page and the blockage ended up not really
>> happening.
>> >> However, next steps remain undetermined.
>> >> Sorry, the news is in Portuguese.
>> >> http://olhardigital.uol.com.br/noticia/juiz-manda-
>> >> bloquear-facebook-em-todo-o-brasil-por-24-horas/62909
>> >>
>> >> Best,
>> >>
>> >> Renata
>> >>
>> >> ____________________________________________________________
>> >> 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
>>
>> --
>> Ellery Roberts Biddle
>> Global Voices, Advocacy Director
>> @ellerybiddle
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> # # #
> # • #
> # # #
> *Carolina Rossini *
> Vice President, International Policy and Strategy
> + 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
> PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
> *PublicKnowledge* | @publicknowledge <https://twitter.com/publicknowledge>
>  | www.publicknowledge.org
> 1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161012/4f5c39e6/attachment.htm>

From lea at gp-digital.org  Mon Oct  3 09:40:08 2016
From: lea at gp-digital.org (Lea Kaspar)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 14:40:08 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: [IGFmaglist] IGF Retreat Proceedings: Ideas and
 Suggestions
In-Reply-To: <4d2af9b6-d66d-8dc6-fa07-90977e08bf91@unog.ch>
References: <4d2af9b6-d66d-8dc6-fa07-90977e08bf91@unog.ch>
Message-ID: <CAJTVAjxXNEjuiSh+MC=EVq4_bwdbFOVSHGVTRZR3_H+VZ0M+XA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Please see below the info from the IGF Secretariat regarding the extension
of the period for comment on the IGF Retreat outcome doc.

NB - only 3 comments in total were received by the community before the
original deadline expired.

With best wishes,
Lea

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Chengetai Masango <cmasango at unog.ch>
Date: Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 2:33 PM
Subject: [IGFmaglist] IGF Retreat Proceedings: Ideas and Suggestions
To: igfmaglist at intgovforum.org


Dear All,

Due to requests we are extending the comment period for the IGF Community
Consultation for the IGF Retreat Proceedings  : ideas and suggestions
<http://www.intgovforum.org/review/igf-retreat-proceedings-ideas-and-suggestions/>
until *31 October.*

I would be grateful if you could all publicize this extension amongst your
respective constituencies.

Best regards

Chengetai



_______________________________________________
Igfmaglist mailing list
Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
http://intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igfmaglist_intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161003/43ec8d9c/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 23:53:39 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 00:53:39 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
In-Reply-To: <CAK78muSmEOs9MesNaaNBXY6tJbgYiBr9XAYW+trXPo6JkKFTww@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK78muR9+Ub==91Z-er7C9XFVP2wLMgywpE1KUQokstm30CYvg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAU+vPGPByfKVKhgq1i2K5HVnxLLw8U=y0EnvFv=PdEraFTO4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <6e7adddd-572d-2291-e48e-1e46d4c9af5b@mixmax.com> <CAK78muSmEOs9MesNaaNBXY6tJbgYiBr9XAYW+trXPo6JkKFTww@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMokdMzH5A8YiO5HW3TpnC5Hkk8AzJUoQtC+V7hdc03rfyH0xQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Sheetal,

Thanks for the reply. Indeed the candidates rise to the position with great
contributions already registered.
And, once more, congrats to the elected.

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 6:00 AM, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
wrote:

> Dear Renata,
>
> As far as I am aware, there were no other candidates - however, in the end
> both were unanimously supported by CSCG reps for the position of co-chairs.
>
> Best,
> Sheetal.
>
> On 8 October 2016 at 15:44, Renata Aquino Ribeiro <raquino at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Sheetal
>>
>> Thank you for the message
>> Congratulations to Analia and Richard
>>
>> Do we get to know who were the other candidates?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Renata
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 4:45 PM, Wisdom Donkor wisdom.dk at gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> Amalia and Richard, congratulations to you.
>>>
>>> Kindly let us no where the party is taken place.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> On Friday, October 7, 2016, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> We are writing to let you know of the outcome of the election for CSCG
>>> chairs <http://internetgov-cs.org/procedures>.
>>>
>>> With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG
>>> <http://internetgov-cs.org/>), which works to ensure a co-ordinated
>>> civil society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society
>>> appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new chairpersons team:
>>> Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected unanimously, and they
>>> will serve as equal Co-chairs.
>>>
>>> This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair
>>> of CSCG, as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for
>>> serving another term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his skillful
>>> leadership over the past years.
>>>
>>> Any questions do let us know!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Sheetal & Poncelet
>>> --
>>> *Sheetal Kumar*
>>> Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
>>> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
>>> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)*
>>> E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist
>>> National Information Technology Agency (NITA)/
>>> Ghana Open Data Initiative Project.
>>> ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,
>>> Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation Member,
>>> OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN Memember, ITAG Member
>>> Email: wisdom_dk at hotmail.com
>>> wisdom.donkor at data.gov.gh
>>> wisdom.dk at gmail.com
>>> Skype: wisdom_dk
>>> facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
>>> Website: www.nita.gov.gh / www.data.gov.gh
>>> www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
>
>
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161013/e45d146a/attachment.htm>

From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Oct 15 10:48:11 2016
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:18:11 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
Date: 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
From: 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
To: 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, &lt
<" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>



Hi All

I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly of
India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and
multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no article
that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and catches properly
the different nuances that are involved. Such a monochromatic discourse
in the global IG space is not a good indication. There is an especial
lack of views from a progressive and social justice perspective, and
from the geopolitical South, both of which I have tried to catch in this
brief article. 


  *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*

"The recent decision of the United States government to cede its control
over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the Internet
Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a US-based
international non-profit body, is heralded as a significant step towards
the globalisation of internet’s core infrastructure. But with ICANN
having no special jurisdictional immunity and subject to the whims of
the judicial and legislative branches of the US government as well as
many of its executive agencies, the decision seems more symbolic than
meaningful."

http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html

Comments are welcome.
parminder
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161015/c591543d/attachment.htm>

From kawsu.sillah at gmail.com  Sun Oct 16 06:00:54 2016
From: kawsu.sillah at gmail.com (Kawsu Sillah)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 11:00:54 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Livestream: 5th AfIGF 16-18 Oct, Durban
Message-ID: <CAH6w8W5y+2W_cuM0rvuBwD9mcs6gCEa38XiEv3p2R1ce=7EFRg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Colleagues,

Apologies for cross-posting.

The 5th meeting of the African Internet Governance Forum, is currently
underway in Durban, South Africa.

For those of you interested to participate remotely, please join using the
link Livestreaming: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/zndcZASeqKJ

You can as well interact with hanlde @AfrIGF and hashtag #afigf #afigf2016
on Twitter.

See you there!

Best,

Kawsu.

Youth at AfIGF2016.

-- 
Best Regards,


[image: --]
Kawsu Sillah
[image: https://]about.me/ksillah
<https://about.me/ksillah?promo=email_sig>
AMBASSADOR <https://ideas.itu.int/page/view/933> ITU Telecom World Young
Innovators Competition.

Mobile : +220 9865300 |  6865300 | 3965300
Skype: profkawsu   |  Facebook: Kawsu.f.Sillah
<https://www.facebook.com/kawsu.f.sillah>
Twitter: @ksillah1  | LinkedIn: KAWSU SILLAH
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=103784437&trk=nav_responsive_tab_profile_pic>

*‘Every single person must have access to a computer, must understand it,
must have access to good software and good teachers and to the Internet, so
that every person will have the opportunity to make the most of his or her
own life’ – Bill Clinton, the former US President.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161016/eb6a36a4/attachment.htm>

From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca  Sun Oct 16 09:09:46 2016
From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz)
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2016 09:09:46 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Blurring the Lines Market-Driven and Democracy-Driven
 Freedom of Expression
Message-ID: <D428F41D.5D36E%roberta.lentz@mcgill.ca>

This may be of interest to some in the BB communityŠ


> 
> New anthology from Nordicom
> Maria Edström, Andrew T. Kenyon, Eva-Maria Svensson (eds.)
> Blurring the Lines
> Market-Driven and Democracy-Driven Freedom of Expression
>  
>  
>  
>  
> Download pdf <http://www.nordicom.gu.se/en/publikationer/blurring-lines>  (OA)
> or order a print copy
> Contents
>  
> Preface   
> Maria Edström, Andrew T. Kenyon, Eva-Maria Svensson
> Introduction: Rethinking Freedom of Expression and Media Freedom
> Ulla Carlsson
> Opening speech: Freedom of Expression in Transition. A Media Perspective
>  
> I. FREE SPEECH, THE STATE AND TENSIONS
> Andrew T. Kenyon
> Who, What, Why and How. Questions for Positive Free Speech and Media Systems
> Kari Karppinen
> Beyond Positive and Negative Conceptions of Free Speech
> Hans-Gunnar Axberger
> Freedom of Expression as a Public Service
> Victor Pickard
> Toward a People¹s Internet. The Fight for Positive Freedoms in an Age of
> Corporate Libertarianism
> Katharine Sarikakis
> Europe¹s Many Crises and the Confinement of Democracy-Driven Free Speech
> John Morison
> The Democratic Dynamics of Government Consultations. Speaking Freely and
> Listening Properly
>  
> II. IN BETWEEN ADVERTISING AND JOURNALISM
> Justin Lewis
> The Commercial Constraints on Speech Limit Democratic Debate
> Tamara R. Piety
> Killing the Golden Goose.
> Will Blending Advertising and Editorial Content Diminish the Value of Both?
> Eva-Maria Svensson
> Upholding the Division Between Editorial and Commercial Content in Legislation
> and Self-Regulation
> Fredrik Stiernstedt
> Blurring the Boundaries in Practice? Economic,
> Organisational and Regulatory Barriers Against Native Advertising
> Maria Edström
> Audience Advertising Fatigue and New Alliances to Finance Content in
> Broadcasting 
> Bengt Johansson, Stina Bengtsson
> On-Line Life in a Commercialised World. The Commodification of Mediated Social
> Relations 
> Crystal Abidin, Mart Ots
> Influencers Tell All? Unravelling Authenticity and Credibility in a Brand
> Scandal 
> III. RESTRICTIONS AND CONTROL OF MEDIA CONTENT
> Torbjörn von Krogh
> ³Self-Regulate, or We Will Regulate Your Content².
> Are State Threats of Regulation Threats to Freedom of Speech?
> Marta Martín-Llaguno
> Limiting Market-Driven Freedom of Expression by Regulating Sexist Advertising
> in Spain. 
> An Evaluation of and Some Shadows from the First Decade
> David Brax
> Hate Speech and the Distribution of the Costs and Benefits of Freedom of
> Speech 
> Magnus Hoem Iversen
> Breaking the Ban. The Use of Televised Political Advertising in Norway
>  
> The Authors 




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161016/ccb9badd/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6558 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161016/ccb9badd/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 5017 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161016/ccb9badd/attachment-0001.jpg>

From carolina.rossini at gmail.com  Mon Oct 17 03:51:56 2016
From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:51:56 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Map of the Internet - actually answers to questions
 about the internet
In-Reply-To: <CAJLokZbY=BbpRKt2DQ3XcgB+m+A81XP51USgYS2Avb08rUCJ7Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJLokZbY=BbpRKt2DQ3XcgB+m+A81XP51USgYS2Avb08rUCJ7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK-FJAfZoD8G0zw0tHNSsVNU6=KoMQ0TB3Kph_h1PHsmEPZQmA@mail.gmail.com>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: *C R Wright* <crwr77 at gmail.com>
Date: Monday, October 17, 2016
Subject: Map of the Internet - actually answers to questions about the
internet
To: "crwr77 at gmail.com" <crwr77 at gmail.com>


There are a number of subsections to this website. Each is listed below. If
you click on the topic (except the first one, click on the URL that is
provided), you will be taken to a document that explains each topic. For
example, the first subsection presents a map that shows the installation of
Internet underwater cables over time. There is much to explore and think
about. So take your time to examine each section or at least those that
interest you. crw

From: http://qz.com/se/map-of-the-internet/


This map shows the explosive growth of underwater cables that power the
global internet, http://qz.com/657898/this-map-
shows-the-explosive-growth-of-underwater-cables-the-power-
the-global-internet/

The internet has been quietly rewired, and video is the reason why
<http://qz.com/742474/how-streaming-video-changed-the-shape-of-the-internet/>

How countries like China and Russia are able to control the internet
<http://qz.com/780675/how-do-internet-censorship-and-surveillance-actually-work/>

Where your data flows on the internet matters, and you have no control over
it
<http://qz.com/741166/where-your-data-flows-on-the-internet-matters-and-you-have-no-control-over-it/>

Why your internet probably doesn’t come through a satellite, but maybe will
one day
<http://qz.com/772972/the-speed-coverage-cost-and-future-of-satellite-internet/>

These beautiful photos reveal the internet is hiding in plain sight
<http://qz.com/770849/these-beautiful-photos-reveal-the-internet-is-hiding-in-plain-sight/>

The story of the humble latex, which laid the foundation for the global web
<http://qz.com/785119/the-forgotten-tropical-tree-sap-that-set-off-a-victorian-tech-boom-and-gave-us-global-telecommunications/>

Murky international laws threaten to break up the internet as we know it
<http://qz.com/735314/the-murky-world-of-international-law-is-threatening-to-break-up-the-internet/>

How the company behind League of Legends rebuilt its own internet backbone
so that it’s faster for gamers
<http://qz.com/790208/how-the-company-behind-league-of-legends-rebuilt-its-own-internet-backbone-so-that-its-faster-for-gamers/>

Tracing the byzantine maze of the companies that have come to control
America’s internet
<http://qz.com/790210/tracing-the-byzantine-maze-of-the-companies-that-have-come-to-control-americas-internet/>
How do you make a map of the internet?
<http://qz.com/798039/how-do-you-make-a-map-of-the-internet/>
.



-- 

# # #
# • #
# # #
*Carolina Rossini *
Vice President, International Policy and Strategy
+ 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
*PublicKnowledge* | @publicknowledge <https://twitter.com/publicknowledge>
 | www.publicknowledge.org
1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161017/51a2e2e2/attachment.htm>

From m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk  Mon Oct 17 07:50:59 2016
From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk (Marianne Franklin)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 12:50:59 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>

Dear Parminder

Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN and 
it future.

Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the ICANN 
transition has been published on the openDemocracy series, Human Rights 
and the Internet, at 
https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann. 


best

MF


On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
> Date: 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
> From: 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
> To: 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, 
> &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>
>
>
>
> Hi All
>
> I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly of 
> India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and 
> multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no 
> article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and 
> catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a 
> monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good 
> indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive and 
> social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South, both of 
> which I have tried to catch in this brief article.
>
>
>   *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*
>
> "The recent decision of the United States government to cede its 
> control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the 
> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a 
> US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a significant 
> step towards the globalisation of internet’s core infrastructure. But 
> with ICANN having no special jurisdictional immunity and subject to 
> the whims of the judicial and legislative branches of the US 
> government as well as many of its executive agencies, the decision 
> seems more symbolic than meaningful."
>
> http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html
>
> Comments are welcome.
> parminder
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

-- 
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 207 9197072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
@netrights

Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri

Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#

Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough

“What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161017/502e993d/attachment.htm>

From parminder at itforchange.net  Mon Oct 17 09:07:07 2016
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 18:37:07 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>



On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>
> Dear Parminder
>
> Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN
> and it future.
>
> Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the
> ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy series, Human
> Rights and the Internet, at
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann.
>
>
Thanks Marianne,

Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months back,
and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment. But then,
isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS groups in India
consider that not much has happened with the so called 'transition' in
terms of loosening of US control over ICANN, there is simply no murmurs
in the CS community globally to actually take this issue up - in a
political manner, like making a statement and so on. I may repeat what I
have said so many tomes earlier - in all the multistakeholder meetings
that I saw organised in India in the transition processes it was always
concluded that there are two key issues to sort out - an 'external'
oversight mechanism, and jurisdiction issue. What we have is an
oversight which is hardly external, and the jurisdiction issue is being
completely buried. But still it seems that everyone -- more or less -- 
is just celebrating the 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.

As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement or in
other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US was the demand
of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all round social- political
importance of the domain name system has only greatly enhanced in the
last 10 years, and so the US's jurisdictional control over it should be
ever less acceptable -- but why is no major civil society group today
able to get up and say the same thing which IGC said and asked for in
2005? Especially when a process is actually taking place which is
formally examining the jurisdiction question. I sometimes participate in
that ICANN WG on jurisdiction, where every effort is on to bury this
question - and i finds almost no civil society voice there.

People here may want to ponder this question - has the US stranglehold
on the IG discourse actually tightened since then - meaning WSIS in
2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons, which I did not think of,
and others can enlighten me on. (not addressed to you Marianne :), it is
general)

Parminder

PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion is
on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they want to
respond to both elists or one of them.


> best
>
> MF
>
>
> On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
>> Date: 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
>> From: 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>> To: 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>,
>> &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All
>>
>> I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly of
>> India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and
>> multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no
>> article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and
>> catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a
>> monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good
>> indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive and
>> social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South, both of
>> which I have tried to catch in this brief article. 
>>
>>
>>   *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*
>>
>> "The recent decision of the United States government to cede its
>> control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the
>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a
>> US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a significant
>> step towards the globalisation of internet’s core infrastructure. But
>> with ICANN having no special jurisdictional immunity and subject to
>> the whims of the judicial and legislative branches of the US
>> government as well as many of its executive agencies, the decision
>> seems more symbolic than meaningful."
>>
>> http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html
>>
>> Comments are welcome.
>> parminder
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
> -- 
> Marianne Franklin, PhD
> Professor of Global Media and Politics
> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
> Goldsmiths (University of London)
> Department of Media & Communications
> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
> Tel: +44 207 9197072
> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
> @GloComm
> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> @netrights
>
> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet 
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>
> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) 
> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# 
>
> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) 
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>
> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” 
> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161017/47d25182/attachment.htm>

From m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk  Mon Oct 17 09:46:14 2016
From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk (Marianne Franklin)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:46:14 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>

Dear Parminder, Others (am also copying in the IRPC list).

There is clearly still lots to debate, on the macro level of past and 
future ownership and control of the strategically important aspects of 
the internet's infrastructure (content being another matter altogether). 
To date the debates about ICANN, positions for/against and all other 
shades, have occurred on lists with well informed, and committed 
participants.

To date there is little out there for an informed, wider public. This is 
why comments on the Prakash piece 
<https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann>, 
or indeed others on this page that may relate to the spectrum of issues 
that keeps all these lists alive and actively arriving in our in=boxes, 
would help inform that wider audience.

It is a key reason why I have been working with openDemocracy to present 
these issues to a wider readership so all comments welcome to the ICANN 
piece.

Other articles, including a critical analysis of a UK-based initiative 
for digital rights by Paul Bernal available at 
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri.

warm wishes

MF

On 17/10/2016 14:07, parminder wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>
>> Dear Parminder
>>
>> Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN 
>> and it future.
>>
>> Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the 
>> ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy series, 
>> Human Rights and the Internet, at 
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann. 
>>
>>
> Thanks Marianne,
>
> Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months 
> back, and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment. But 
> then, isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS groups in 
> India consider that not much has happened with the so called 
> 'transition' in terms of loosening of US control over ICANN, there is 
> simply no murmurs in the CS community globally to actually take this 
> issue up - in a political manner, like making a statement and so on. I 
> may repeat what I have said so many tomes earlier - in all the 
> multistakeholder meetings that I saw organised in India in the 
> transition processes it was always concluded that there are two key 
> issues to sort out - an 'external' oversight mechanism, and 
> jurisdiction issue. What we have is an oversight which is hardly 
> external, and the jurisdiction issue is being completely buried. But 
> still it seems that everyone -- more or less --  is just celebrating 
> the 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.
>
> As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement or 
> in other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US was the 
> demand of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all round social- 
> political importance of the domain name system has only greatly 
> enhanced in the last 10 years, and so the US's jurisdictional control 
> over it should be ever less acceptable -- but why is no major civil 
> society group today able to get up and say the same thing which IGC 
> said and asked for in 2005? Especially when a process is actually 
> taking place which is formally examining the jurisdiction question. I 
> sometimes participate in that ICANN WG on jurisdiction, where every 
> effort is on to bury this question - and i finds almost no civil 
> society voice there.
>
> People here may want to ponder this question - has the US stranglehold 
> on the IG discourse actually tightened since then - meaning WSIS in 
> 2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons, which I did not think 
> of, and others can enlighten me on. (not addressed to you Marianne :), 
> it is general)
>
> Parminder
>
> PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion is 
> on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they want to 
> respond to both elists or one of them.
>
>
>> best
>>
>> MF
>>
>>
>> On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:
>>>
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> Subject: 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
>>> Date: 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
>>> From: 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>> To: 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, 
>>> &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly 
>>> of India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and 
>>> multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no 
>>> article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and 
>>> catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a 
>>> monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good 
>>> indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive 
>>> and social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South, 
>>> both of which I have tried to catch in this brief article.
>>>
>>>
>>>   *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*
>>>
>>> "The recent decision of the United States government to cede its 
>>> control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the 
>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a 
>>> US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a significant 
>>> step towards the globalisation of internet’s core infrastructure. 
>>> But with ICANN having no special jurisdictional immunity and subject 
>>> to the whims of the judicial and legislative branches of the US 
>>> government as well as many of its executive agencies, the decision 
>>> seems more symbolic than meaningful."
>>>
>>> http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html
>>>
>>> Comments are welcome.
>>> parminder
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> -- 
>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>> Department of Media & Communications
>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>> @GloComm
>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>> @netrights
>>
>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>
>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#  
>>
>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>
>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/    
>

-- 
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 207 9197072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
@netrights

Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri

Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#

Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough

“What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161017/1bf75854/attachment.htm>

From parminder at itforchange.net  Mon Oct 17 10:05:15 2016
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 19:35:15 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
 <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>



On Monday 17 October 2016 07:16 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>
> Dear Parminder, Others (am also copying in the IRPC list).
>
> There is clearly still lots to debate,
>

Yes Marianne, but the political moment of reckoning does not wait for
all debates to conclude - debates that has now been happening for more
than 10 years. The jurisdiction question is being considered formally
"right now" in the transition process, as it is called, In a few months
it will be formally declared that the global multi stakeholder community
- which is supposed to includes me and you, and all the debators -- have
concluded by full or rough consensus that the current jurisdictional
status remains the best bet for ICANN. The 'decision' will be touted in
our name. IGC 11 years ago took a political position in the middle of
debates - political activism requires that. 11 years hence the debates
cannot be less mature then they were before - I am just wondering, what
happened meanwhile... Well, isnt that too an important question by
itself to ask, and explore, for activists and academics alike. Just
clarifying what was the accent of my posting. Meanwhile, yes, more
debates and articles and comments continue to remain welcome, and shd
keep coming. But maybe, civil society's job includes some political role
too!

Meanwhile I do recommend to everyone to read this excellent series of IG
related articles published in OpenDemocracy and coordinated by Marianne.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri . Debates, academic exercises, and
political action must all go together.

best regards

parminder
>
> on the macro level of past and future ownership and control of the
> strategically important aspects of the internet's infrastructure
> (content being another matter altogether). To date the debates about
> ICANN, positions for/against and all other shades, have occurred on
> lists with well informed, and committed participants.
>
> To date there is little out there for an informed, wider public. This
> is why comments on the Prakash piece
> <https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann>,
> or indeed others on this page that may relate to the spectrum of
> issues that keeps all these lists alive and actively arriving in our
> in=boxes, would help inform that wider audience.
>
> It is a key reason why I have been working with openDemocracy to
> present these issues to a wider readership so all comments welcome to
> the ICANN piece.
>
> Other articles, including a critical analysis of a UK-based initiative
> for digital rights by Paul Bernal available at
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri.
>
> warm wishes
>
> MF
>
> On 17/10/2016 14:07, parminder wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Parminder
>>>
>>> Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN
>>> and it future.
>>>
>>> Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the
>>> ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy series,
>>> Human Rights and the Internet, at
>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann.
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks Marianne,
>>
>> Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months
>> back, and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment. But
>> then, isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS groups in
>> India consider that not much has happened with the so called
>> 'transition' in terms of loosening of US control over ICANN, there is
>> simply no murmurs in the CS community globally to actually take this
>> issue up - in a political manner, like making a statement and so on.
>> I may repeat what I have said so many tomes earlier - in all the
>> multistakeholder meetings that I saw organised in India in the
>> transition processes it was always concluded that there are two key
>> issues to sort out - an 'external' oversight mechanism, and
>> jurisdiction issue. What we have is an oversight which is hardly
>> external, and the jurisdiction issue is being completely buried. But
>> still it seems that everyone -- more or less --  is just celebrating
>> the 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.
>>
>> As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement or
>> in other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US was the
>> demand of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all round social-
>> political importance of the domain name system has only greatly
>> enhanced in the last 10 years, and so the US's jurisdictional control
>> over it should be ever less acceptable -- but why is no major civil
>> society group today able to get up and say the same thing which IGC
>> said and asked for in 2005? Especially when a process is actually
>> taking place which is formally examining the jurisdiction question. I
>> sometimes participate in that ICANN WG on jurisdiction, where every
>> effort is on to bury this question - and i finds almost no civil
>> society voice there.
>>
>> People here may want to ponder this question - has the US
>> stranglehold on the IG discourse actually tightened since then -
>> meaning WSIS in 2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons, which
>> I did not think of, and others can enlighten me on. (not addressed to
>> you Marianne :), it is general)
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>> PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion is
>> on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they want to
>> respond to both elists or one of them.
>>
>>
>>> best
>>>
>>> MF
>>>
>>>
>>> On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:
>>>>
>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>> Subject: 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
>>>> Date: 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
>>>> From: 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>>> To: 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>,
>>>> &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi All
>>>>
>>>> I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly
>>>> of India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and
>>>> multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no
>>>> article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and
>>>> catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a
>>>> monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good
>>>> indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive
>>>> and social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South,
>>>> both of which I have tried to catch in this brief article. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*
>>>>
>>>> "The recent decision of the United States government to cede its
>>>> control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the
>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a
>>>> US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a
>>>> significant step towards the globalisation of internet’s core
>>>> infrastructure. But with ICANN having no special jurisdictional
>>>> immunity and subject to the whims of the judicial and legislative
>>>> branches of the US government as well as many of its executive
>>>> agencies, the decision seems more symbolic than meaningful."
>>>>
>>>> http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html
>>>>
>>>> Comments are welcome.
>>>> parminder
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>>> Department of Media & Communications
>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>> @GloComm
>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>> @netrights
>>>
>>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet 
>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>>
>>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) 
>>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# 
>>>
>>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) 
>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>>
>>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” 
>>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/   
>>
>
> -- 
> Marianne Franklin, PhD
> Professor of Global Media and Politics
> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
> Goldsmiths (University of London)
> Department of Media & Communications
> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
> Tel: +44 207 9197072
> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
> @GloComm
> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
> @netrights
>
> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet 
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>
> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) 
> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# 
>
> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) 
> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>
> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” 
> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/   

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161017/1e8dfcd0/attachment.htm>

From m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk  Mon Oct 17 10:54:05 2016
From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk (Marianne Franklin)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 15:54:05 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
 <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
 <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>

Dear Parminder

Thanks for the thumbs-up regarding the HRI series on openDemocracy 
<https://opendemocracy.net/hri>. And, indeed, debate and action are not 
always the same thing. But action and attitudes can be influenced by 
debates that take internal, expert-driven issues out into the wider 
world. And as the world is increasingly online, activists (and 
academics) and policymakers (and designers) cannot any more expect 
public fora to be ready and waiting for topics that are as arcane as 
they are deeply political, and politicized.

To that end, talk is not cheap, and actions do speak as loudly as words.

Seeing this issue discussed in a public forum, and not surprisingly I am 
advocating this particular one given the high-quality contributions from 
people who are on these lists, and who are re also active in a range of 
other networks (e.g. scholarly, policy-based, activist), is becoming 
increasingly needed. Politicians are making decisions based on a lack of 
access to the nuances of these issues, to put it lightly.

Might I also have that our students in universities are becoming 
increasingly engaged in the implications of a range of internet 
governance decisions and interventions by all stakeholders.... they are 
seldom addressed in these circles even as they constitute the leaders of 
tomorrow.

Thanks to everyone on this series for committing to bringing these 
debates out into the open!

best

MF


On 17/10/2016 15:05, parminder wrote:
>
>
>
> On Monday 17 October 2016 07:16 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>
>> Dear Parminder, Others (am also copying in the IRPC list).
>>
>> There is clearly still lots to debate,
>>
>
> Yes Marianne, but the political moment of reckoning does not wait for 
> all debates to conclude - debates that has now been happening for more 
> than 10 years. The jurisdiction question is being considered formally 
> "right now" in the transition process, as it is called, In a few 
> months it will be formally declared that the global multi stakeholder 
> community - which is supposed to includes me and you, and all the 
> debators -- have concluded by full or rough consensus that the current 
> jurisdictional status remains the best bet for ICANN. The 'decision' 
> will be touted in our name. IGC 11 years ago took a political position 
> in the middle of debates - political activism requires that. 11 years 
> hence the debates cannot be less mature then they were before - I am 
> just wondering, what happened meanwhile... Well, isnt that too an 
> important question by itself to ask, and explore, for activists and 
> academics alike. Just clarifying what was the accent of my posting. 
> Meanwhile, yes, more debates and articles and comments continue to 
> remain welcome, and shd keep coming. But maybe, civil society's job 
> includes some political role too!
>
> Meanwhile I do recommend to everyone to read this excellent series of 
> IG related articles published in OpenDemocracy and coordinated by 
> Marianne. https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri . Debates, academic 
> exercises, and political action must all go together.
>
> best regards
>
> parminder
>>
>> on the macro level of past and future ownership and control of the 
>> strategically important aspects of the internet's infrastructure 
>> (content being another matter altogether). To date the debates about 
>> ICANN, positions for/against and all other shades, have occurred on 
>> lists with well informed, and committed participants.
>>
>> To date there is little out there for an informed, wider public. This 
>> is why comments on the Prakash piece 
>> <https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann>, 
>> or indeed others on this page that may relate to the spectrum of 
>> issues that keeps all these lists alive and actively arriving in our 
>> in=boxes, would help inform that wider audience.
>>
>> It is a key reason why I have been working with openDemocracy to 
>> present these issues to a wider readership so all comments welcome to 
>> the ICANN piece.
>>
>> Other articles, including a critical analysis of a UK-based 
>> initiative for digital rights by Paul Bernal available at 
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri.
>>
>> warm wishes
>>
>> MF
>>
>> On 17/10/2016 14:07, parminder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Parminder
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN 
>>>> and it future.
>>>>
>>>> Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the 
>>>> ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy series, 
>>>> Human Rights and the Internet, at 
>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Thanks Marianne,
>>>
>>> Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months 
>>> back, and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment. 
>>> But then, isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS groups 
>>> in India consider that not much has happened with the so called 
>>> 'transition' in terms of loosening of US control over ICANN, there 
>>> is simply no murmurs in the CS community globally to actually take 
>>> this issue up - in a political manner, like making a statement and 
>>> so on. I may repeat what I have said so many tomes earlier - in all 
>>> the multistakeholder meetings that I saw organised in India in the 
>>> transition processes it was always concluded that there are two key 
>>> issues to sort out - an 'external' oversight mechanism, and 
>>> jurisdiction issue. What we have is an oversight which is hardly 
>>> external, and the jurisdiction issue is being completely buried. But 
>>> still it seems that everyone -- more or less --  is just celebrating 
>>> the 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.
>>>
>>> As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement or 
>>> in other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US was the 
>>> demand of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all round social- 
>>> political importance of the domain name system has only greatly 
>>> enhanced in the last 10 years, and so the US's jurisdictional 
>>> control over it should be ever less acceptable -- but why is no 
>>> major civil society group today able to get up and say the same 
>>> thing which IGC said and asked for in 2005? Especially when a 
>>> process is actually taking place which is formally examining the 
>>> jurisdiction question. I sometimes participate in that ICANN WG on 
>>> jurisdiction, where every effort is on to bury this question - and i 
>>> finds almost no civil society voice there.
>>>
>>> People here may want to ponder this question - has the US 
>>> stranglehold on the IG discourse actually tightened since then - 
>>> meaning WSIS in 2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons, which 
>>> I did not think of, and others can enlighten me on. (not addressed 
>>> to you Marianne :), it is general)
>>>
>>> Parminder
>>>
>>> PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion is 
>>> on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they want to 
>>> respond to both elists or one of them.
>>>
>>>
>>>> best
>>>>
>>>> MF
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>>> Subject: 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
>>>>> Date: 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
>>>>> From: 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>>>> To: 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org 
>>>>> <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, &lt <" 
>>>>> bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All
>>>>>
>>>>> I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly 
>>>>> of India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important 
>>>>> and multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across 
>>>>> no article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and 
>>>>> catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a 
>>>>> monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good 
>>>>> indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive 
>>>>> and social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South, 
>>>>> both of which I have tried to catch in this brief article.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*
>>>>>
>>>>> "The recent decision of the United States government to cede its 
>>>>> control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the 
>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a 
>>>>> US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a 
>>>>> significant step towards the globalisation of internet’s core 
>>>>> infrastructure. But with ICANN having no special jurisdictional 
>>>>> immunity and subject to the whims of the judicial and legislative 
>>>>> branches of the US government as well as many of its executive 
>>>>> agencies, the decision seems more symbolic than meaningful."
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Comments are welcome.
>>>>> parminder
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>>>> Department of Media & Communications
>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>>>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>>> @GloComm
>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>>>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>>>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>>> @netrights
>>>>
>>>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>>>
>>>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
>>>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#  
>>>>
>>>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>>>
>>>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
>>>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>>>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/    
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>> Department of Media & Communications
>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>> @GloComm
>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>> @netrights
>>
>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>
>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#  
>>
>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>
>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/    
>

-- 
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 207 9197072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
@netrights

Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri

Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#

Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough

“What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161017/d69c8013/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Mon Oct  3 13:35:42 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2016 17:35:42 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] IGF - Registration of bilateral rooms for meetings
Message-ID: <934e6490-99d7-cc7c-8117-ec3306dcdb73@mixmax.com>

[NEW]The IGF Secretariat is  Rooms will be available at the PALCCO Centre in
Guadalajara from Day 0 (5 December) through Day 4 (9 December). Kindly contact
the Secretariat atemazzucchi at unog.ch with your requestnow accepting requests to
reserve bilateral meeting rooms at IGF 2016.

Sent with Mixmax
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161003/cc6f69b5/attachment.htm>

From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu  Mon Oct 17 23:47:42 2016
From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen)
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 23:47:42 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] Is the Internet Really Free of US
 Control?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801D3AF95@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A801D3AF95@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <C922F14F-4178-4657-A49E-05689ACAD558@post.harvard.edu>

I appreciate the effort.  However.


On Oct 17, 2016, at 6:07 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
...

> The lesson I learned is that it is much better to look forward and to innovate policy making

Innovation is 'good' only when it serves a 'good' purpose - obviously.  Plenty of innovation, unfortunately, has had dark undersides - along with different, other change that does serve us.

Then:

> than to reactivate the diplomatic instruments of the 20th century to settle the 21st century problems.

It may be beguiling to take a tick-over in human-created numbering - 21st versus 20th century - as some sort of analytic tool.  In fact, there is _nothing_ inherent in the distinction between these two time periods.  If reasoning and fact can be advanced to show distinctions, then perhaps there can be something useful to talk about.

In the meantime, we need to focus on demonstrable problems, then solutions.

In that regard:

> ... to move from a hierarichal oversight mechanism to a network oversight mechanism

First, we need to know what problem is being solved.  But then, for such a proposed solution, we have to have sound delineation of what such a thing may be.  Then - perhaps - there can be useful analysis as to modalities and whether and how results emerge.

Most especially, then, whether those results fit outcomes we agree serve the public good.  Most especially, whether such proposed mechanisms underpin democracy.  Particularly when contrasted with established practice.

In the meantime ...

As a response here noted, accountability remains a glaring difficulty.  As has been, for going on now the two decades of this story.  Without a 'turnaround' on this that has been a wholly intractable problem, we cannot take our eyes off it.  The problem virtually guarantees to pervert the prospect for service to the public good.

David



From ayden at ferdeline.com  Tue Oct 18 12:08:15 2016
From: ayden at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 12:08:15 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
 <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
 <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
 <c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>

Hi Parminder,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic. I agree that it is appropriate and necessary to critically examine the IANA stewardship transition. I have read a number of articles documenting legitimate criticisms of the transition from different stakeholder groups. Nonetheless, I have not heard anyone say that the better solution would have been for ICANN not to become more accountable, not to let the stewardship of the IANA functions transition from the NTIA to the multistakeholder community.

But let’s leave that aside for a moment. There is something in your article that I wanted to pick up upon, and I think it's important. You mention the delegation of .xxx and say it is being challenged in US courts for “for allegedly violating competition law.” Okay… Can you please explain to me your problem with this? .xxx is operated by ICM Registry, a company incorporated in the United States. If ICM has violated US antitrust laws, it is subject to the US legal system because ICM is incorporated in the United States, not because ICANN is headquartered in the United States. Likewise, for your example of the generic drugs company, if they’re infringing upon someone else’s IP, I’m sure they’ll be sued in whatever jurisdiction the registry for “.genericdrugs” can be located within. It doesn’t stand to reason to me that a dispute between two private parties, one of which is not based in and does not do business in the United States, is going to be resolved in a US court. Let’s inverse the scenario. Say ICANN was headquartered in India. A generic American drugs company operates “.genericdrugs” and is sued by, say, a Spanish competitor. Would they really file the lawsuit in India? Or would they file it in the United States, where the drugs company has its assets?

I think it is useful to remember what the IANA transition was all about. It was about empowering the global, multistakeholder community to oversee the activities carried out by ICANN. It was not about making sure ICANN was not subject to US law.

Finally, maybe it's the realist in me, but I’d like to note that attempting to get “jurisdictional immunities as available to other global governance bodies like those of the UN” (to quote your article) sounds very time consuming and highly resource intensive. I am just trying to think how we might go about that? So we’d need 160+ sovereign states to sign an international treaty? You want established a “special digital bench of the International Court of Justice” and new “international laws”? And we – the multistakeholder community – would write them? Who/what gives us that authority? I have not been following the IANA transition from the very beginning, but I will venture to guess that such an option was never on the table… that said, if I am mistaken and there was a missed opportunity to embark upon such an ambitious project, feel free to set the record straight… ;-)

Thanks again for starting this conversation and sharing your Op-Ed. It's good to be able to have this dialogue.




Ayden Férdeline
[linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
Local Time: 17 October 2016 3:54 PM
UTC Time: 17 October 2016 14:54
From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
To: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>, BestBitsList <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org <irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>



Dear Parminder


Thanks for the thumbs-up regarding the [HRI series on openDemocracy](https://opendemocracy.net/hri). And, indeed, debate and action are not always the same thing. But action and attitudes can be influenced by debates that take internal, expert-driven issues out into the wider world. And as the world is increasingly online, activists (and academics) and policymakers (and designers) cannot any more expect public fora to be ready and waiting for topics that are as arcane as they are deeply political, and politicized.


To that end, talk is not cheap, and actions do speak as loudly as words.


Seeing this issue discussed in a public forum, and not surprisingly I am advocating this particular one given the high-quality contributions from people who are on these lists, and who are re also active in a range of other networks (e.g. scholarly, policy-based, activist), is becoming increasingly needed. Politicians are making decisions based on a lack of access to the nuances of these issues, to put it lightly.


Might I also have that our students in universities are becoming increasingly engaged in the implications of a range of internet governance decisions and interventions by all stakeholders.... they are seldom addressed in these circles even as they constitute the leaders of tomorrow.


Thanks to everyone on this series for committing to bringing these debates out into the open!


best


MF


On 17/10/2016 15:05, parminder wrote:




On Monday 17 October 2016 07:16 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:

Dear Parminder, Others (am also copying in the IRPC list).


There is clearly still lots to debate,



Yes Marianne, but the political moment of reckoning does not wait for all debates to conclude - debates that has now been happening for more than 10 years. The jurisdiction question is being considered formally "right now" in the transition process, as it is called, In a few months it will be formally declared that the global multi stakeholder community - which is supposed to includes me and you, and all the debators -- have concluded by full or rough consensus that the current jurisdictional status remains the best bet for ICANN. The 'decision' will be touted in our name. IGC 11 years ago took a political position in the middle of debates - political activism requires that. 11 years hence the debates cannot be less mature then they were before - I am just wondering, what happened meanwhile... Well, isnt that too an important question by itself to ask, and explore, for activists and academics alike. Just clarifying what was the accent of my posting. Meanwhile, yes, more debates and articles and comments continue to remain welcome, and shd keep coming. But maybe, civil society's job includes some political role too!

Meanwhile I do recommend to everyone to read this excellent series of IG related articles published in OpenDemocracy and coordinated by Marianne. https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri . Debates, academic exercises, and political action must all go together.

best regards

parminder


on the macro level of past and future ownership and control of the strategically important aspects of the internet's infrastructure (content being another matter altogether). To date the debates about ICANN, positions for/against and all other shades, have occurred on lists with well informed, and committed participants.


To date there is little out there for an informed, wider public. This is why comments on the [Prakash piece](https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann), or indeed others on this page that may relate to the spectrum of issues that keeps all these lists alive and actively arriving in our in=boxes, would help inform that wider audience.


It is a key reason why I have been working with openDemocracy to present these issues to a wider readership so all comments welcome to the ICANN piece.


Other articles, including a critical analysis of a UK-based initiative for digital rights by Paul Bernal available at https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri.


warm wishes


MF

On 17/10/2016 14:07, parminder wrote:




On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:

Dear Parminder


Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN and it future.


Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy series, Human Rights and the Internet, at https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann.


Thanks Marianne,

Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months back, and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment. But then, isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS groups in India consider that not much has happened with the so called 'transition' in terms of loosening of US control over ICANN, there is simply no murmurs in the CS community globally to actually take this issue up - in a political manner, like making a statement and so on. I may repeat what I have said so many tomes earlier - in all the multistakeholder meetings that I saw organised in India in the transition processes it was always concluded that there are two key issues to sort out - an 'external' oversight mechanism, and jurisdiction issue. What we have is an oversight which is hardly external, and the jurisdiction issue is being completely buried. But still it seems that everyone -- more or less -- is just celebrating the 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.

As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement or in other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US was the demand of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all round social- political importance of the domain name system has only greatly enhanced in the last 10 years, and so the US's jurisdictional control over it should be ever less acceptable -- but why is no major civil society group today able to get up and say the same thing which IGC said and asked for in 2005? Especially when a process is actually taking place which is formally examining the jurisdiction question. I sometimes participate in that ICANN WG on jurisdiction, where every effort is on to bury this question - and i finds almost no civil society voice there.

People here may want to ponder this question - has the US stranglehold on the IG discourse actually tightened since then - meaning WSIS in 2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons, which I did not think of, and others can enlighten me on. (not addressed to you Marianne :), it is general)

Parminder

PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion is on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they want to respond to both elists or one of them.







best


MF


On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:



-------- Forwarded Message --------

Subject:
Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?

Date:
Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530

From:
parminder [<parminder at itforchange.net>](mailto:parminder at itforchange.net)

To:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org [<governance at lists.igcaucus.org>](mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org), &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>




Hi All


I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly of India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive and social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South, both of which I have tried to catch in this brief article.





Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?


"The recent decision of the United States government to cede its control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a significant step towards the globalisation of internet’s core infrastructure. But with ICANN having no special jurisdictional immunity and subject to the whims of the judicial and legislative branches of the US government as well as many of its executive agencies, the decision seems more symbolic than meaningful."


http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html

Comments are welcome.
parminder


____________________________________________________________ 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


-- Marianne Franklin, PhD Professor of Global Media and Politics Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program Goldsmiths (University of London) Department of Media & Communications New Cross, London SE14 6NW Tel: +44 207 9197072 [<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>](mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk) @GloComm http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition ) www.internetrightsandprinciples.org @netrights Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/



-- Marianne Franklin, PhD Professor of Global Media and Politics Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program Goldsmiths (University of London) Department of Media & Communications New Cross, London SE14 6NW Tel: +44 207 9197072 [<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>](mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk) @GloComm http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition ) www.internetrightsandprinciples.org @netrights Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/



-- Marianne Franklin, PhD Professor of Global Media and Politics Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program Goldsmiths (University of London) Department of Media & Communications New Cross, London SE14 6NW Tel: +44 207 9197072 [<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>](mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk) @GloComm http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/ Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet) Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition ) www.internetrightsandprinciples.org @netrights Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161018/a9a33c3f/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 13:46:18 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:46:18 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] [governance] [JNC - Forum] Appointment of CSCG
 Chairpersons
In-Reply-To: <CABi6_T8+nVe4a1GnAWtH-yHQr_PQXxXvX1z+8vSNGh5ZF6FqYA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20161012143409.029a55a3@quill> <CAOz-jXQaAAzgbxmnvjGtAX+7RqzvdcW+FOQy6b+rG63Xmb5G+w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMc__opAzVpO16dwHsmSTWRLhLPL=CS0WXiMoConB99C9_UNSA@mail.gmail.com> <CABi6_T8+nVe4a1GnAWtH-yHQr_PQXxXvX1z+8vSNGh5ZF6FqYA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMokdMzKJV_xBb8RP+5smRci=EqjGi5YfydEOLW6gdtEz4WUrQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Analia

It is great to know you and Richard Hill are bringing new energy to CSCG

Yesterday at an IGF MAG Meeting (which is for MAG members only but can
be listened to by appointed observers) brought the question of MAG
Renewal for 2017

Secretariat asked MAG members if the names of nominations have to be public.

It was like that until IGF Retreat process.

I think CSCG should be involved in this debate, regarding the civil
society nominations.

I would note that IGF Retreat contributions had only 2 comments made
and their deadline was extended to 31 Oct.

Perhaps it is time for civil society internet governance groups
consider joining in efforts to identify what is wanted from the IGF
MAG nomination process.

Thanks

Renata



On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 2:37 PM, Analia Aspis <analia.aspis at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you very much for all your congratulatuons. And mostly thank Ian that
> from the very beginning shared all his knowledge about the network and its
> dynamics.
>
> From my part, I am ready to welcome allyour concerns and comments.
>
> Regards,
> Analia
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 12, 2016, Remmy Nweke <remmyn at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Congrats Analia and Rich
>>
>> Thanks plentifully for Ian for all the works and steering this group to a
>> successful hand.
>> Regards
>> Remmy
>>
>> ____
>> REMMY NWEKE, mNGE,
>> Lead Strategist/Group Executive Editor,
>> DigitalSENSE Africa Media [Multiple-award winning medium]
>> (DigitalSENSE Business News; ITREALMS, NaijaAgroNet)
>> Block F1, Shop 133 Moyosore Aboderin Plaza, Bolade Junction, Oshodi-Lagos
>> M: 234-8033592762, 8023122558, 8051000475, T: @ITRealms
>> Author: A Decade of ICT Reportage in Nigeria
>> PC Summit 2016, December 1-2 @Federal Palace, Victoria Island, Lagos.
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> *Confidentiality Notice:* The information in this document and attachments
>> are confidential and may also be privileged information. It is intended only
>> for the use of the named recipient. Remmy Nweke does not accept legal
>> responsibility for the contents of this e-mail. If you are not the intended
>> recipient, please notify me immediately, then delete this document and do
>> not disclose the contents of this document to any other person, nor make any
>> copies. Violators may face court persecution.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Chris Prince Udochukwu Njoku
>> <udochukwu.njoku at unn.edu.ng> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is interesting news.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> CPU
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: "Norbert Bollow" <nb at bollow.ch>
>>> Date: 12 Oct 2016 1:37 pm
>>> Subject: [JNC - Forum] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
>>> To: "JNC Forum" <forum at justnetcoalition.org>
>>> Cc:
>>>
>>> FYI... both candidates for the CSCG chairperson role have been
>>> unanimously elected. The official announcement is now online at
>>> http://internetgov-cs.org/ and copied below.
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>> Norbert
>>>
>>>
>>> Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
>>>
>>> Oct 12, 2016
>>>
>>> With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG
>>> <http://internetgov-cs.org/>), which works to ensure a co-ordinated
>>> civil society response and conduit when it comes to making civil
>>> society appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new
>>> chairpersons team: Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected
>>> unanimously, and they will serve as equal Co-chairs.
>>>
>>> This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair
>>> of CSCG, as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for
>>> serving another term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his
>>> skillful leadership over the past years.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Forum mailing list
>>> Forum at justnetcoalition.org
>>> http://mail.justnetcoalition.org/listinfo/forum
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>      http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>

From bzs at TheWorld.com  Tue Oct 18 14:52:57 2016
From: bzs at TheWorld.com (bzs at TheWorld.com)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 14:52:57 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
	<a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
	<bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
	<ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
	<2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
	<e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
	<c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>
	<NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <22534.28553.420166.448103@gargle.gargle.HOWL>


Although the issue certainly has older roots I believe some of this
ICANN jurisdictional discussion was energized by this 2014 lawsuit:

  http://www.domainpulse.com/2014/06/26/israeli-american-terrorism-victims-sue-seize-irans-cctld/

   Israeli And American Terrorism Victims Sue To Seize Iran’s ccTLD

you can find many other articles on the suit.

Plaintiffs were unsuccessful in this aspect of their pursuit of assets.

ICANN was served and responded:

  https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icann-response-writs-subpoenas-28jul14-en.pdf

-- 
        -Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die    | bzs at TheWorld.com             | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD       | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989  | A Public Information Utility | *oo*

From ayden at ferdeline.com  Tue Oct 18 15:06:21 2016
From: ayden at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 15:06:21 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <22534.28553.420166.448103@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
 <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
 <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
 <c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>
 <NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
 <22534.28553.420166.448103@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <QO5-8y3w333H3U2-E8VzmKEVD1TuaEKPiU8UynJP8L27DORKZCmyUA6DM9N39rO1LAPmoxYOzXT9M3wTTqxjYNGzfuCud8-ruO4jMpRKSf8=@ferdeline.com>

I am familiar — an appellate court issued an opinion on the case back in August: [https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/D35ACE5F0E9673C085258003005094AE/$file/14-7193.pdf ](https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/D35ACE5F0E9673C085258003005094AE/$file/14-7193.pdf)

Here is an extract from a commentary on the case from Phil Corwin (please pay particular attention to the final sentence; emphasis has been added): "In my view, this result avoids the possibility of a major erosion of confidence and participation in ICANN by ccTLD operators by making clear that a respected Court of Appeals in the U.S. possesses adequate technical understanding of the DNS to avoid a legal decision that could lead to technical and political instability — many nations would not wish to continue in a DNS coordinated by a U.S. non-profit corporation if it could be ordered by a U.S. court to transfer control of any nation's ccTLD. This decision will also hopefully tamp down calls by some parties for ICANN's place of incorporation to be moved outside of the U.S. by demonstrating that ICANN's jurisdiction does not create a threat to other nation's ccTLDs."

Best wishes,



Ayden Férdeline
[linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
Local Time: 18 October 2016 7:52 PM
UTC Time: 18 October 2016 18:52
From: bzs at TheWorld.com
To: Ayden Férdeline <ayden at ferdeline.com>
Marianne Franklin <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>, BestBitsList <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>


Although the issue certainly has older roots I believe some of this
ICANN jurisdictional discussion was energized by this 2014 lawsuit:

http://www.domainpulse.com/2014/06/26/israeli-american-terrorism-victims-sue-seize-irans-cctld/

Israeli And American Terrorism Victims Sue To Seize Iran’s ccTLD

you can find many other articles on the suit.

Plaintiffs were unsuccessful in this aspect of their pursuit of assets.

ICANN was served and responded:

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/icann-response-writs-subpoenas-28jul14-en.pdf

--
-Barry Shein

Software Tool & Die | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161018/527dd0fe/attachment.htm>

From lorena at collaboratory.de  Wed Oct 19 17:07:05 2016
From: lorena at collaboratory.de (Lorena Jaume-Palasi)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 23:07:05 +0200
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: [governance] EuroDIG & SEEDIG. Call for issues now
 open
In-Reply-To: <1520979664.17553.9197b743-0c1b-4079-9add-75cc54ecab2a.open-xchange@email.1und1.de>
References: <1520979664.17553.9197b743-0c1b-4079-9add-75cc54ecab2a.open-xchange@email.1und1.de>
Message-ID: <CAPqXojK+10yx6-cSh2zwTC2WDbAAiHqVb4uTzkc5sy8SjhVd3g@mail.gmail.com>

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lorena Jaume-Palasi <lorena at eurodig.org>
Date: 2016-10-19 23:05 GMT+02:00
Subject: [governance] EuroDIG & SEEDIG. Call for issues now open
To: irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org, Civil IGC Society Internet
Governance Caucus - <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>


Dear all,

apologies for crossposting.

*SEEDIG and EuroDIG - Call for issues*

The call for issues
<https://www.eurodig.org/index.php?id=409&no_cache=1&tx_cpsproposals_proposals%5Baction%5D=new&amp;tx_cpsproposals_proposals%5Bcontroller%5D=Proposal&amp;no_cache=1>
is out now and we are looking forward to receive submission until 31
December 2016 / 24:00 UTC. This is again a joint call, both for EuroDIG
(taking place in Tallin, 6-7th of June) and the South Eastern European
Dialogue on Internet Governance (SEEDIG) which will take place on 18th May
2016 in Ohrid, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

*Please note:*  This is not a call for sessions or workshop proposals, we
are asking for issues and topics of high interest to many stakeholders
across Europe. In order to facilitate the structuring of the proposals, we
are suggesting a number of categories that you can attribute to your
suggested issue or topic – or if you think that your suggested topic does
not fit into one of the categories, you can suggest a new one.

Looking much forward to reading your submissions!

Kind regards,

Lorena

Lorena Jaume-Palasí
Director Communications & Youth Engagement

European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG)
office at eurodig.org
www.eurodig.org

Cel: +49.179.919 578

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t




-- 

Lorena Jaume-Palasí ∙ Coordinator, Global Internet Governance Arbeitsgruppe

Internet & Gesellschaft Co:llaboratory e.V.

www.intgovforum.de ∙ www.collaboratory.de ∙ Newsletter
<http://feedburner.google.com/fb/a/mailverify?uri=collaboratory&loc=de_DE> ∙
 Facebook <http://goo.gl/eJVZn> ∙ Twitter <http://goo.gl/sUFM5> ∙ Youtube
<http://www.youtube.com/user/CollaboratoryVideo?feature=CCAQwRs%3D>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161019/423aff3a/attachment.htm>

From kawsu.sillah at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 06:34:29 2016
From: kawsu.sillah at gmail.com (Kawsu Sillah)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:34:29 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: [kictanet] Kenya School of Internet Governance:
 KICTANet Calls for Applications
In-Reply-To: <CAMwG4pwhNiE7HeYGdMRfdfs=tj8t3+8BF4s4RHf8RqXDiQC4Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAMwG4pwhNiE7HeYGdMRfdfs=tj8t3+8BF4s4RHf8RqXDiQC4Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH6w8W5gf4ns_9VWgP1-5VrExCXgPL4m5aDGmOzwnZ8YxRGbnQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Colleagues,

Apologies for cross posting and possible duplication.

This is for those of you in Kenya.

Kind regards,

Kawsu.


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Grace Mutung'u (Bomu) via kictanet <kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke>
Date: Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 10:06 AM
Subject: [kictanet] Kenya School of Internet Governance: KICTANet Calls for
Applications
To: Kawsu Sillah <kawsu.sillah at gmail.com>
Cc: "Grace Mutung'u (Bomu)" <nmutungu at gmail.com>


Dear Listers,


KICTANet in partnership with HIVOS East Africa and Facebook is pleased to
announce an open call for participants of the first Kenya School of
Internet Governance (KeSIG).



We are interested in getting citizens from all sectors: government,
academia, tech community, civil society, bloggers and journalists  who are
new to Internet Governance issues.


KeSIG is an introductory course covering technical, economic, legal and
contemporary social issues brought about by the Internet.
​The main topics to be covered include:


   1.

   Introduction to Internet Governance
   2.

   Main issues in Internet Governance in Kenya
   3.

   Kenya’s Internet Governance policy /legal framework(s)
   4. Internet Governance processes and how to engage in them


The training will use a participatory approach and will have faculty
sourced from all stakeholder groups. It will take place at Strathmore
University from 16th to 18th November 2016.



​Please apply here
<https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfqUujJUxh_hJFaaRE9EckBhNj0Od61IXZSBopcwGvMUDiAfA/viewform?c=0&w=1>
.





If you have any questions, do not hesitate to get in touch with Liz Orembo
(lizorembo at gmail.com) who is coordinating this project.


Kind Regards,



-- 
Grace L.N. Mutung'u
Nairobi Kenya
Skype: gracebomu
Twitter: @Bomu

<http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/profile/GraceMutungu>

PGP ID : 0x33A3450F


_______________________________________________
kictanet mailing list
kictanet at lists.kictanet.or.ke
https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/mailman/listinfo/kictanet

Unsubscribe or change your options at https://lists.kictanet.or.ke/
mailman/options/kictanet/kawsu.sillah%40gmail.com

The Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet) is a multi-stakeholder platform for
people and institutions interested and involved in ICT policy and
regulation. The network aims to act as a catalyst for reform in the ICT
sector in support of the national aim of ICT enabled growth and development.

KICTANetiquette : Adhere to the same standards of acceptable behaviors
online that you follow in real life: respect people's times and bandwidth,
share knowledge, don't flame or abuse or personalize, respect privacy, do
not spam, do not market your wares or qualifications.



-- 

*Open, Till NOV 18, 2016:*
Call for Nominations: Executive Council, African Youth Commission
<http://www.africanyouthcommission.org/call-for-nominations-executive-council-african-youth-commission/>




Best Regards,


[image: --]
Kawsu Sillah
[image: https://]about.me/ksillah
<https://about.me/ksillah?promo=email_sig>
AMBASSADOR <https://ideas.itu.int/page/view/933> ITU Telecom World Young
Innovators Competition.

Mobile : +220 9865300 |  6865300 | 3965300
Skype: profkawsu   |  Facebook: Kawsu.f.Sillah
<https://www.facebook.com/kawsu.f.sillah>
Twitter: @ksillah1  | LinkedIn: KAWSU SILLAH
<https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=103784437&trk=nav_responsive_tab_profile_pic>

*‘Every single person must have access to a computer, must understand it,
must have access to good software and good teachers and to the Internet, so
that every person will have the opportunity to make the most of his or her
own life’ – Bill Clinton, the former US President.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161021/97e685cf/attachment.htm>

From jmalcolm at eff.org  Fri Oct 21 13:14:56 2016
From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 10:14:56 -0700
Subject: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil society meeting
 (very limited travel support)
Message-ID: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>

On Tuesday 25 October 1300 UTC the organizers of this year's pre-IGF
meeting will be closing off registrations by those who are requesting
travel support (if you're not, then you have an extra month).  We have
only a tiny amount of money for travel support anyway, and the criteria
are as follows:

10 points if you will be contributing to a session
10 points for high engagement in one or multiple networks
10 points if you are from a developing country
10 points if your net need for funding is $500 or less
- 10 points if you can come without funding support
15 points if you have a chairperson or other key facilitation role in
cross-network civil society coordination activities such as CSCG.

Here is where you can register:

http://bestbits.net/events/joint-cs-2016/

If you want to contribute to a session, please let me know and I'll put
you in touch with the right people.

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161021/1bd41379/attachment.sig>

From steve at openmedia.org  Fri Oct 21 01:53:56 2016
From: steve at openmedia.org (Steve Anderson)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 22:53:56 -0700
Subject: [bestbits] Shared engagement tools for digital rights advocates
Message-ID: <CAJOr_J52UQ6+0RXf9iV6ZD5Z8dXj=qj8pdqh-eoJYAZoj8YzPg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all, If you're attending Mozfest
<http://t.sidekickopen17.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs3LqXMYW7d-mYg8qlQzqVRrZFz56dwBzd8PYxC02?t=https%3A%2F%2Fmozillafestival.org%2F&si=5688634727202816&pi=9e5d6de2-275f-4908-9af7-9de503b30d9d>next
weekend I just wanted to invite everyone to a workshop I'm
facilitating on Creating
a Shared Set of Engagement Tools for Digital Rights Advocates.
<http://t.sidekickopen17.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs3LqXMYW7d-mYg8qlQzqVRrZFz56dwBzd8PYxC02?t=http%3A%2F%2Fevents.newmode.net%2Fmozfest_2016&si=5688634727202816&pi=9e5d6de2-275f-4908-9af7-9de503b30d9d>

Key digital policy battles require ongoing online engagement tools from
organizations that are often under-resourced or don’t have all the
technical tools they need. What if we could solve this problem together,
creating a open source “toolkit” of organizing tools that all of us can?

NewMode, in collaboration with OpenMedia and other open Internet advocates,
want to develop a digital rights campaign platform that provides advocates
across the board with affordable access to advanced online advocacy tools.

Join us for a session that will help inform a roadmap for the shared
platform for digital rights campaigners.

Participants will also come away with an overview of advanced online
campaigning tools and best practices for online engagement.

Please RSVP so we can shape the workshop to fit your interests:
http://events.newmode.net/mozfest_2016.
<http://t.sidekickopen17.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs3LqXMYW7d-mYg8qlQzqVRrZFz56dwBzd8PYxC02?t=http%3A%2F%2Fevents.newmode.net%2Fmozfest_2016&si=5688634727202816&pi=9e5d6de2-275f-4908-9af7-9de503b30d9d>
(I believe it will be live streamed and if so we'll send the link to those
to rsvp)

Thanks
--
*Steve Anderson*
Founder, Senior Strategist and Internet Governance Analyst
OpenMedia.org | *The Internet Needs You -->>* http://openmedia.org

*We've launched a social enterprise! Support OpenMedia and benefit from our
digital engagement tools on your campaigns: tools.newmode.net
<http://t.sidekickopen17.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs3LqXMYW7d-mYg8qlQzqVRrZFz56dwBzd8PYxC02?t=http%3A%2F%2Ftools.newmode.net%2F&si=5688634727202816&pi=9e5d6de2-275f-4908-9af7-9de503b30d9d>
.

604-837-5730
Follow me on Twitter
<http://t.sidekickopen17.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs3LqXMYW7d-mYg8qlQzqVRrZFz56dwBzd8PYxC02?t=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FSteve_Media&si=5688634727202816&pi=9e5d6de2-275f-4908-9af7-9de503b30d9d>
Follow me on Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/Steve.Media>

**You have the right to link to content and services of your choice online
-->> Save The Link
<http://t.sidekickopen17.com/e1t/c/5/f18dQhb0S7lC8dDMPbW2n0x6l2B9nMJW7t5XZs3LqXMYW7d-mYg8qlQzqVRrZFz56dwBzd8PYxC02?t=http%3A%2F%2Fsavethelink.org%2F&si=5688634727202816&pi=9e5d6de2-275f-4908-9af7-9de503b30d9d>*


*Confidentiality Warning:*

* This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the
intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be privileged. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review,
retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use
of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return
e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank
you.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161020/dbfd8469/attachment.htm>

From lmcknigh at syr.edu  Fri Oct 21 18:58:26 2016
From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 22:58:26 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
 <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
 <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
 <c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>,<NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <1477090706354.73783@syr.edu>

​Ayden,


Thanks for your comments on Parminder's article.


Of course Parminder can and no doubt will speak for himself.


I did want to fill in a small bit of the historical record for you, and perhaps this may be helpful to others (and Parminder and others should of course correct my recollections if I have misstated anything):


Some of us did advocate early on for a 'Framework Convention' at international level as a post-WSIS follow on; which could have (after say perhaps a decade) led to a new international treaty instrument defining Internet rights and principles.


Analagous to what was done for Law of the Sea back in the 70s/80s; and more recently for climate change.


That notion went over with many around the the Internet, and ICANN, like the proverbial lead balloon. Meaning: nowhere.


By 2008 @ the Hyderabad IGF, Parminder and I and friends and colleagues merged the nascent dynamic coalition on Internet rights, and dynamic coalition of Internet principles.


Which led to the Charter on Internet Rights and Principles, and fed into subsequent efforts like the NetMundial principles...none of which had the pretense of assuming an international body could take over or internationalize ICANN.


In that period however, the concept of an internationalized ICANN reincorporated perhaps in Switzerland with immunities along the lines of what Parminder suggests, and similar to the arrangements for international organizations like the Red Cross/Red Crescent, and - FIFA - were still being kicked around.


Not too far since there was limited enthusiasm for undertaking such an effort, and practically none from government stakeholders which would have had to front much of the cost/divert significant budget at the UN  to the effort.


Not to mention the private sector basically hating the idea.


Not to mention we would have all been subjected to a decade of scare-mongering headlines about 'the UN taking over the Internet.'


OK, we got those stories anyway, but it could have been way worse.


Anyway, mentioning FIFA shows the real stumbling block: it is one thing to suggest folks that may drive ambulances into war zones should have special protections.


It is another thing to suggest a corner of the Internet where selfless advocates are engaged AND where money sloshes around - should have similar protections.


As evidenced by the long effort to bring the accountability reforms into the ICANN process as the quid pro quo for the IANA transition.


Which is finally done, yay.


So in sum....we could either blame, or credit, Sepp Blatter and cronies excuse me respected senior FIFA football/soccer officials with basically destroying any possible momentum towards that kind of internationalization of ICANN through their proven rampant greed and abuse of their positions.  At least at that time.


And this time.


Lee

________________________________
From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net <bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net> on behalf of Ayden Férdeline <ayden at ferdeline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 12:08 PM
To: Marianne Franklin
Cc: parminder; BestBitsList
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?

Hi Parminder,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic. I agree that it is appropriate and necessary to critically examine the IANA stewardship transition. I have read a number of articles documenting legitimate criticisms of the transition from different stakeholder groups. Nonetheless, I have not heard anyone say that the better solution would have been for ICANN not to become more accountable, not to let the stewardship of the IANA functions transition from the NTIA to the multistakeholder community.

But let’s leave that aside for a moment. There is something in your article that I wanted to pick up upon, and I think it's important. You mention the delegation of .xxx and say it is being challenged in US courts for “for allegedly violating competition law.” Okay… Can you please explain to me your problem with this? .xxx is operated by ICM Registry, a company incorporated in the United States. If ICM has violated US antitrust laws, it is subject to the US legal system because ICM is incorporated in the United States, not because ICANN is headquartered in the United States. Likewise, for your example of the generic drugs company, if they’re infringing upon someone else’s IP, I’m sure they’ll be sued in whatever jurisdiction the registry for “.genericdrugs” can be located within. It doesn’t stand to reason to me that a dispute between two private parties, one of which is not based in and does not do business in the United States, is going to be resolved in a US court. Let’s inverse the scenario. Say ICANN was headquartered in India. A generic American drugs company operates “.genericdrugs” and is sued by, say, a Spanish competitor. Would they really file the lawsuit in India? Or would they file it in the United States, where the drugs company has its assets?

I think it is useful to remember what the IANA transition was all about. It was about empowering the global, multistakeholder community to oversee the activities carried out by ICANN. It was not about making sure ICANN was not subject to US law.

Finally, maybe it's the realist in me, but I’d like to note that attempting to get “jurisdictional immunities as available to other global governance bodies like those of the UN” (to quote your article) sounds very time consuming and highly resource intensive. I am just trying to think how we might go about that? So we’d need 160+ sovereign states to sign an international treaty? You want established a “special digital bench of the International Court of Justice” and new “international laws”? And we – the multistakeholder community – would write them? Who/what gives us that authority? I have not been following the IANA transition from the very beginning, but I will venture to guess that such an option was never on the table… that said, if I am mistaken and there was a missed opportunity to embark upon such an ambitious project, feel free to set the record straight… ;-)

Thanks again for starting this conversation and sharing your Op-Ed. It's good to be able to have this dialogue.

Ayden Férdeline
linkedin.com/in/ferdeline<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
Local Time: 17 October 2016 3:54 PM
UTC Time: 17 October 2016 14:54
From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
To: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>, BestBitsList <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org <irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>



Dear Parminder

Thanks for the thumbs-up regarding the HRI series on openDemocracy<https://opendemocracy.net/hri>. And, indeed, debate and action are not always the same thing. But action and attitudes can be influenced by debates that take internal, expert-driven issues out into the wider world. And as the world is increasingly online, activists (and academics) and policymakers (and designers) cannot any more expect public fora to be ready and waiting for topics that are as arcane as they are deeply political, and politicized.

To that end, talk is not cheap, and actions do speak as loudly as words.

Seeing this issue discussed in a public forum, and not surprisingly I am advocating this particular one given the high-quality contributions from people who are on these lists, and who are re also active in a range of other networks (e.g. scholarly, policy-based, activist), is becoming increasingly needed. Politicians are making decisions based on a lack of access to the nuances of these issues, to put it lightly.

Might I also have that our students in universities are becoming increasingly engaged in the implications of a range of internet governance decisions and interventions by all stakeholders.... they are seldom addressed in these circles even as they constitute the leaders of tomorrow.

Thanks to everyone on this series for committing to bringing these debates out into the open!

best

MF

On 17/10/2016 15:05, parminder wrote:


On Monday 17 October 2016 07:16 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:

Dear Parminder, Others (am also copying in the IRPC list).

There is clearly still lots to debate,

Yes Marianne, but the political moment of reckoning does not wait for all debates to conclude - debates that has now been happening for more than 10 years. The jurisdiction question is being considered formally "right now" in the transition process, as it is called, In a few months it will be formally declared that the global multi stakeholder community - which is supposed to includes me and you, and all the debators -- have concluded by full or rough consensus that the current jurisdictional status remains the best bet for ICANN. The 'decision' will be touted in our name. IGC 11 years ago took a political position in the middle of debates - political activism requires that. 11 years hence the debates cannot be less mature then they were before - I am just wondering, what happened meanwhile... Well, isnt that too an important question by itself to ask, and explore, for activists and academics alike. Just clarifying what was the accent of my posting. Meanwhile, yes, more debates and articles and comments continue to remain welcome, and shd keep coming. But maybe, civil society's job includes some political role too!

Meanwhile I do recommend to everyone to read this excellent series of IG related articles published in OpenDemocracy and coordinated by Marianne. https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri . Debates, academic exercises, and political action must all go together.

best regards

parminder


on the macro level of past and future ownership and control of the strategically important aspects of the internet's infrastructure (content being another matter altogether). To date the debates about ICANN, positions for/against and all other shades, have occurred on lists with well informed, and committed participants.

To date there is little out there for an informed, wider public. This is why comments on the Prakash piece<https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann>, or indeed others on this page that may relate to the spectrum of issues that keeps all these lists alive and actively arriving in our in=boxes, would help inform that wider audience.

It is a key reason why I have been working with openDemocracy to present these issues to a wider readership so all comments welcome to the ICANN piece.

Other articles, including a critical analysis of a UK-based initiative for digital rights by Paul Bernal available at https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri.

warm wishes

MF

On 17/10/2016 14:07, parminder wrote:


On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:

Dear Parminder

Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on ICANN and it future.

Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for the ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy series, Human Rights and the Internet, at https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann.

Thanks Marianne,

Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months back, and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment. But then, isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS groups in India consider that not much has happened with the so called 'transition' in terms of loosening of US control over ICANN, there is simply no murmurs in the CS community globally to actually take this issue up - in a political manner, like making a statement and so on. I may repeat what I have said so many tomes earlier - in all the multistakeholder meetings that I saw organised in India in the transition processes it was always concluded that there are two key issues to sort out - an 'external' oversight mechanism, and jurisdiction issue. What we have is an oversight which is hardly external, and the jurisdiction issue is being completely buried. But still it seems that everyone -- more or less --  is just celebrating the 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.

As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement or in other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US was the demand of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all round social- political importance of the domain name system has only greatly enhanced in the last 10 years, and so the US's jurisdictional control over it should be ever less acceptable -- but why is no major civil society group today able to get up and say the same thing which IGC said and asked for in 2005? Especially when a process is actually taking place which is formally examining the jurisdiction question. I sometimes participate in that ICANN WG on jurisdiction, where every effort is on to bury this question - and i finds almost no civil society voice there.

People here may want to ponder this question - has the US stranglehold on the IG discourse actually tightened since then - meaning WSIS in 2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons, which I did not think of, and others can enlighten me on. (not addressed to you Marianne :), it is general)

Parminder

PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion is on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they want to respond to both elists or one of them.





best

MF

On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:
        Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?

Date:
        Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530

From:
        parminder <parminder at itforchange.net><mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>

To:
        governance at lists.igcaucus.org<mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org> <governance at lists.igcaucus.org><mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>, &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>




Hi All

I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political Weekly of India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an important and multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have come across no article that is other than absolutely celebratory about it, and catches properly the different nuances that are involved. Such a monochromatic discourse in the global IG space is not a good indication. There is an especial lack of views from a progressive and social justice perspective, and from the geopolitical South, both of which I have tried to catch in this brief article.


Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?

"The recent decision of the United States government to cede its control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a significant step towards the globalisation of internet’s core infrastructure. But with ICANN having no special jurisdictional immunity and subject to the whims of the judicial and legislative branches of the US government as well as many of its executive agencies, the decision seems more symbolic than meaningful."

http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html

Comments are welcome.
parminder



____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     bestbits at lists.bestbits.net<mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>.
To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
     http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits


--
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 207 9197072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk><mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org<http://www.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
@netrights

Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri

Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#

Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough

“What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/



--
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 207 9197072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk><mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org<http://www.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
@netrights

Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri

Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#

Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough

“What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/



--
Marianne Franklin, PhD
Professor of Global Media and Politics
Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
Goldsmiths (University of London)
Department of Media & Communications
New Cross, London SE14 6NW
Tel: +44 207 9197072
<m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk><mailto:m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
@GloComm
http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
www.internetrightsandprinciples.org<http://www.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
@netrights

Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet
https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri

Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press)
http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews#

Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI)
https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough

“What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?”
co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161021/511911b7/attachment.htm>

From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca  Tue Oct  4 09:52:47 2016
From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 09:52:47 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Policy_Brief=3A_Approaching_States?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=B9_Obligations_Under_a_Prospective_Legally_Binding_Instru?=
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?ment_on_TNCs_In_Regard_to_Human_Rights?=
In-Reply-To: <fa9cf38799136b5660f367ba6d76b691b81.20161004134318@mail215.atl121.mcsv.net>
References: <fa9cf38799136b5660f367ba6d76b691b81.20161004134318@mail215.atl121.mcsv.net>
Message-ID: <D4192C4E.5C84C%roberta.lentz@mcgill.ca>

This may be of interest/relevanceŠ

>   Policy Brief: Approaching States¹ Obligations Under a Prospective Legally
> Binding Instrument on TNCs In Regard to Human Rights
>  
>   
>     
>     
>    
>    
>       
>   View this email in your browser
> <http://us5.campaign-archive1.com/?u=fa9cf38799136b5660f367ba6&id=423c490653&e
> =d76b691b81>     
>     
>   
> Announcing a New Policy Brief from the South Centre
> 
> Approaching States¹ Obligations Under a Prospective Legally Binding Instrument
> on TNCs and Other Business Enterprises In Regard to Human Rights
>  
>             
>     
>    
>     
>   
> The South Centre is pleased to announce the publication of Policy Brief No. 30
> entitled "Approaching States¹ Obligations Under a Prospective Legally Binding
> Instrument on TNCs and Other Business Enterprises In Regard to Human Rights"
> by Kinda Mohamadieh of the South Centre. This brief discusses possible
> approaches to addressing States¹ obligations under a prospective international
> legally binding instrument to regulate, in international human rights law, the
> activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises.The
> duty of the State to protect against human rights violations by private
> entities and to ensure remedies for victims of such violations is well
> established under international human rights law. Yet, given the globalized
> and rapidly evolving economic realities driven by multinational corporations,
> individual States often face limitations in their ability to respond to human
> rights violations by private entities and to exercise their sovereign right to
> regulate. A prospective Instrument could serve as an opportunity to address
> these limitations and enhance international cooperation in this area. To
> access the policy brief directly, go to this webpage:
> https://www.southcentre.int/policy-brief-30-october-2016/
> <http://southcentre.us5.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=fa9cf38799136b5660f367b
> a6&id=5e532342a1&e=d76b691b81>
>  
> To access the South Centre website, where you can also find other policy
> briefs, publications and news items, go to: http://www.southcentre.int
> <http://southcentre.us5.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=fa9cf38799136b5660f367b
> a6&id=889e164ce8&e=d76b691b81> .
>  
> 
>  
> South Centre
> Chemin du Champ d¹Anier 17
> PO Box 228
> 1211 Geneva 19
> Switzerland
> Telephone: (41 22) 791 8050
> Fax: (41 22) 798 8531
> Email: south at southcentre.int
>              
>     
>        
>     
>    
>    
>   Copyright © 2016 South Centre, All rights reserved.
>  You are receiving this email because you subscribed to South Centre
> e-newsletters.
> 
> unsubscribe from this list
> <http://southcentre.us5.list-manage.com/unsubscribe?u=fa9cf38799136b5660f367ba
> 6&id=a9121b95dc&e=d76b691b81&c=423c490653>     update subscription preferences
> <http://southcentre.us5.list-manage1.com/profile?u=fa9cf38799136b5660f367ba6&i
> d=a9121b95dc&e=d76b691b81>
>  
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161004/61d4b333/attachment.htm>

From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Oct 22 00:25:42 2016
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 09:55:42 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil society
 meeting (very limited travel support)
In-Reply-To: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>
References: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>
Message-ID: <8c29b7a2-bd29-5c85-c0c0-8a6696dcf17a@itforchange.net>

Jeremy

I dont have funding for attending the IGF and will like to apply. I
registered through the link you gave but could not see any place to make
a funding application.

Meanwhile, would it also be possible to share the source of funding.

Thanks, parminder


On Friday 21 October 2016 10:44 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 October 1300 UTC the organizers of this year's pre-IGF
> meeting will be closing off registrations by those who are requesting
> travel support (if you're not, then you have an extra month).  We have
> only a tiny amount of money for travel support anyway, and the criteria
> are as follows:
>
> 10 points if you will be contributing to a session
> 10 points for high engagement in one or multiple networks
> 10 points if you are from a developing country
> 10 points if your net need for funding is $500 or less
> - 10 points if you can come without funding support
> 15 points if you have a chairperson or other key facilitation role in
> cross-network civil society coordination activities such as CSCG.
>
> Here is where you can register:
>
> http://bestbits.net/events/joint-cs-2016/
>
> If you want to contribute to a session, please let me know and I'll put
> you in touch with the right people.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161022/ccb61d59/attachment.htm>

From ayden at ferdeline.com  Sat Oct 22 01:40:24 2016
From: ayden at ferdeline.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Ayden_F=C3=A9rdeline?=)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 01:40:24 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil society
 meeting (very limited travel support)
In-Reply-To: <8c29b7a2-bd29-5c85-c0c0-8a6696dcf17a@itforchange.net>
References: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>
 <8c29b7a2-bd29-5c85-c0c0-8a6696dcf17a@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <Ld2IRxj-6erVwsHjorEiyvmLqcBSyDu8V5zCZqTMClCUx1pNZznMKy6Oz9Ci33JPvIuwsr6vD9iExzZL4KIfhcd6Sqv4JvJRIo7rhw7GQQY=@ferdeline.com>

I think this is a very good question — what is the source of funding here? (I ask out of curiosity, as I have been fortunate enough to secure funding to enable my participation already.) Thanks for all that you do, Jeremy.



Ayden Férdeline
[linkedin.com/in/ferdeline](http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline)



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil society meeting (very limited travel support)
Local Time: 22 October 2016 5:25 AM
UTC Time: 22 October 2016 04:25
From: parminder at itforchange.net
To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net



Jeremy


I dont have funding for attending the IGF and will like to apply. I registered through the link you gave but could not see any place to make a funding application.


Meanwhile, would it also be possible to share the source of funding.


Thanks, parminder


On Friday 21 October 2016 10:44 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
On Tuesday 25 October 1300 UTC the organizers of this year's pre-IGF meeting will be closing off registrations by those who are requesting travel support (if you're not, then you have an extra month). We have only a tiny amount of money for travel support anyway, and the criteria are as follows: 10 points if you will be contributing to a session 10 points for high engagement in one or multiple networks 10 points if you are from a developing country 10 points if your net need for funding is $500 or less - 10 points if you can come without funding support 15 points if you have a chairperson or other key facilitation role in cross-network civil society coordination activities such as CSCG. Here is where you can register: http://bestbits.net/events/joint-cs-2016/If you want to contribute to a session, please let me know and I'll put you in touch with the right people.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161022/8f2b5fee/attachment.htm>

From imran at igfpak.org  Sat Oct 22 04:13:23 2016
From: imran at igfpak.org (imran at igfpak.org)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 03:13:23 -0500
Subject: [bestbits] Launching Youth Internet Governance Forum of Pakistan
Message-ID: <20161022031323.Horde.8_DgRA519Ix_cdKI6rwp6Ul@carrera.websitewelcome.com>


Dear All,

On behalf of Urdu Internet Society and Internet Governance Forum of  
Pakistan, I am pleased to announce that today on 22nd October 2016, we  
are launching the initiative of "Youth Internet Governance Forum of  
Pakistan". First Meeting is being held at the Office of SPO Pakistan  
at 3:00 pm today. This is important initiative for the involvement of  
teenagers and young people of our community providing them a platform  
to discuss their Internet related issues and to fill up the  
communication gap between our youth and policy development stakeholders.

Digital presence for ready reference and up to date information may be  
found at http://igfpak.org/ and https://web.facebook.com/yIGF.Pakistan/

Invitation to first Meeting of Youth IGF Pakistan:
yIGFPakistan invites you to attend first Meeting of yIGF Pakistan on  
22nd October 2016 at 3:00pm (Pakistan Time) at the Office of SPO  
Pakistan, Shere Shah Block, Lahore

Miss Erum Arif is assigned the responsibility as an Ambassador to  
Youth IGF Pakistan to organize the event discussion and reach out to  
the community. She may be contacted through email  
[youth(dot)ambassador(at)igfpak(dot)org].

Hopefully the Internet Service will be workable at the meeting.
Please find here under a WebEx Meeting Link for Limited participation  
and shared Contents:

WebEx Meeting Link:  
https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=MBJPIOUGB3LZRU7HOTL4RUL02F-14AR3&rnd=3302.2585094

Thanking you and Best Regards

Imran Ahmed Shah
___________________________________
Coordinator:
-              Youth Internet Governance Forum of Pakistan

President, Founder & Executive Member
-              Linguistic Internet Council, Urdu Internet Society
-              Internet Governance Forum of Pakistan (IGFPak.Org)



From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Oct 22 11:52:07 2016
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 21:22:07 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
In-Reply-To: <NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
References: <d079a657-9d35-5035-beff-2075b5168a09@itforchange.net>
 <a97871c4-959c-acdb-4797-6708f37de6e2@itforchange.net>
 <bacb1e3f-6f6a-3963-3c18-26b3e3b7028a@gold.ac.uk>
 <ceb8f226-c71c-5a8d-06c5-f6df2ae17e9b@itforchange.net>
 <2f279d0f-a12c-1536-5b4e-25c22b7c52ae@gold.ac.uk>
 <e48996d2-efef-5d55-6d2b-6c105e4d3f79@itforchange.net>
 <c3863ae2-14be-2069-2303-cafad8c9d174@gold.ac.uk>
 <NRQssRIc1zTZzEr_DcW5ulnI1jfa3XKAtDYn7uYZ_EzOfg7LM5_0TJmwg22I2z9bZH7E4xsckJwNAhFMArEHyymDUqKagPoAVBz4NkO7fcY=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <76970a50-b5e5-02ff-0202-e7cc05be27d9@itforchange.net>


Ayden, Thanks for your comments. My responses are below.

On Tuesday 18 October 2016 09:38 PM, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> Hi Parminder,
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this topic. I agree that it is
> appropriate and necessary to critically examine the IANA stewardship
> transition. I have read a number of articles documenting legitimate
> criticisms of the transition from different stakeholder groups.
> Nonetheless, I have not heard anyone say that the better solution
> would have been for ICANN not to become more accountable, not to let
> the stewardship of the IANA functions transition from the NTIA to the
> multistakeholder community.

I do not fully understand your last statement, esp what you are implying
by it. Please clarify. (BTW, you may know that ICANN board had clearly
said that the MS community you refer to is *not* representative of the
global public -- this when there was a proposal for a membership based
ICANN organisational model, which was rejected by ICANN/ US, even when
the 'MS community' wanted that. So, firstly there was no real community
based decision making process in the IANA transition, and secondly,
there is a big question on the representativeness of  the so called
'community' . I am open to be corrected on these points.)

>
> But let’s leave that aside for a moment. There is something in your
> article that I wanted to pick up upon, and I think it's important. You
> mention the delegation of .xxx and say it is being challenged in US
> courts for “for allegedly violating competition law.” Okay… Can you
> please explain to me your problem with this? .xxx is operated by ICM
> Registry, a company incorporated in the United States. If ICM has
> violated US antitrust laws, it is subject to the US legal system
> because ICM is incorporated in the United States, not because ICANN is
> headquartered in the United States.

I have no problem with .xxx as a US company being subject to US law, and
being forced to act or not act in particular ways by a US court.... But
if you read about the case you will see that ICANN is also sued, with
three called for causes of action against it.. This is what I am against
-- a US court should not be able to force ICANN's hand, in terms of its
policies and their implementation, which are of a global nature.

> Likewise, for your example of the generic drugs company, if they’re
> infringing upon someone else’s IP, I’m sure they’ll be sued in
> whatever jurisdiction the registry for “.genericdrugs” can be located
> within.

If, as in my example, .genericdrug is a private closed gTLD, the
registry is almost certainly to be in the country of incorporation of
the company .generic drug... So, there is nothing wrong with this
company being sued in the jurisdiction of its incorporation. As for "
infringing upon someone's else's IP" you must recognise that US laws on
this are often different, and more stringent, that many other countries.
And US and its allies are found to pushing their laws on to the rest of
the world, even when the two parties to a transacntion are both outside
these countries. See
http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/dutch-customs-seize-indian-drugs-in-transit-industry-frets-112012300081_1.html 


> It doesn’t stand to reason to me that a dispute between two private
> parties, one of which is not based in and does not do business in the
> United States, is going to be resolved in a US court.

Firstly, I am talking not of private party disputes, but application of
public law, where the state is a party, as also in intellectual property
law. Second, I did not understand why you are saying is either party has
no interest in a country, that country wont take up the case.... It
will, if the other party has a good enough interest.

> Let’s inverse the scenario. Say ICANN was headquartered in India. A
> generic American drugs company operates “.genericdrugs” and is sued
> by, say, a Spanish competitor. Would they really file the lawsuit in
> India? Or would they file it in the United States, where the drugs
> company has its assets?

The equivalence would be not a Spanish plaintiff but an Indian one (as
in my example, is will mostly be US pharma business) -- as to where they
will sue, they will wherever they can have effective instrument of
enforcement - which could be where drug company has physical assets, or
digital assets (a gTLD)....  So, if we replace Spanish plaintiff by
Indian, yes, the Indian company will try and sue in India taking benefit
of the leverage that the US company's digital asset in India - the gTLD
- provides, and expecting the Indian court/ law to be more sympathetic
to its cause, than of the US company...

>
> I think it is useful to remember what the IANA transition was all
> about. It was about empowering the global, multistakeholder community
> to oversee the activities carried out by ICANN. It was not about
> making sure ICANN was not subject to US law.
 
That is your interpretation. The widely endorsed NetMundial statement
says it was about ICANN becoming a "truly global and international
organisation". With that I clearly judge not being subject to one
country's laws, courts, legislature and executive agencies. I cannot see
the term 'truly global and international; in less than that meaning.

>
> Finally, maybe it's the realist in me,

Dont take it personally, but status quo always presents the argument of
realism - has it ever been not so in history, but still how history is
full of positive changes......

> but I’d like to note that attempting to get “jurisdictional immunities
> as available to other global governance bodies like those of the UN”
> (to quote your article) sounds very time consuming and highly resource
> intensive.
Ok, if you are serious, let me give you an easy route... There is
this_United States International Organisations Immunities Act  __
<https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/annex9.pdf>_A US presidential decree
can make any organisation have the status of an international
organisation and qualify for immunity under it. and this includes
organisations that are not incoporated under international law. For
instance,/International Fertilizer and Development Center (IFDC) /was
first established as a private, nonprofit corporation under the laws of
the State of Alabama. However, in March 1977, IFDC was designated as a
public, nonprofit, international organisation by US Presidential Decree
11977, and granted immunities under _United States International
Organisations Immunities Act
<https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/annex9.pdf>_. See
_https://archive.icann.org/en/psc/corell-24aug06.html_

Why cant ICANN similarily be given jurisdictional immunity? I would very
much like to hear your and others' comments on this. Thanks.


> I am just trying to think how we might go about that? So we’d need
> 160+ sovereign states to sign an international treaty?

Yes, every time a treaty is made, 160 + states do it. And they do it
often. Just last week they did one to phase out an important greenhouse
gas.  (ICANN jurisdiction issue on the other hand has been hanging for
at least 13 years, and for 13 years people have been saying how will 160
+ countires ever do a treaty - but since then they have done many of them)

> You want established a “special digital bench of the International
> Court of Justice” and new “international laws”? And we – the
> multistakeholder community – would write them?

No, I can never think of allowing big business to sit on writing laws
and policies -- that is the death of democracy, and I do not know
whether you care for democracy or not.

> Who/what gives us that authority?

Are you asking this question to yourself?? Political authority comes
only form people, and businesses can never have it...

> I have not been following the IANA transition from the very beginning,
> but I will venture to guess that such an option was never on the
> table… that said, if I am mistaken and there was a missed opportunity
> to embark upon such an ambitious project, feel free to set the record
> straight… ;-)

Jursidiciton question was there from the start... They then said, let us
do it in the second post transition phase - and it is being considered
now...
>
> Thanks again for starting this conversation and sharing your Op-Ed.
> It's good to be able to have this dialogue.

Thanks, and I am happy to take it forward....

best regards, parminder
>
> Ayden Férdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] Fwd: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
>> Local Time: 17 October 2016 3:54 PM
>> UTC Time: 17 October 2016 14:54
>> From: m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk
>> To: parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>, BestBitsList
>> <bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>, governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>,
>> irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>> <irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org>
>>
>>
>> Dear Parminder
>>
>> Thanks for the thumbs-up regarding the HRI series on openDemocracy
>> <https://opendemocracy.net/hri>. And, indeed, debate and action are
>> not always the same thing. But action and attitudes can be influenced
>> by debates that take internal, expert-driven issues out into the
>> wider world. And as the world is increasingly online, activists (and
>> academics) and policymakers (and designers) cannot any more expect
>> public fora to be ready and waiting for topics that are as arcane as
>> they are deeply political, and politicized.
>>
>> To that end, talk is not cheap, and actions do speak as loudly as words.
>>
>> Seeing this issue discussed in a public forum, and not surprisingly I
>> am advocating this particular one given the high-quality
>> contributions from people who are on these lists, and who are re also
>> active in a range of other networks (e.g. scholarly, policy-based,
>> activist), is becoming increasingly needed. Politicians are making
>> decisions based on a lack of access to the nuances of these issues,
>> to put it lightly.
>>
>> Might I also have that our students in universities are becoming
>> increasingly engaged in the implications of a range of internet
>> governance decisions and interventions by all stakeholders.... they
>> are seldom addressed in these circles even as they constitute the
>> leaders of tomorrow.
>>
>> Thanks to everyone on this series for committing to bringing these
>> debates out into the open!
>>
>> best
>>
>> MF
>>
>>
>> On 17/10/2016 15:05, parminder wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday 17 October 2016 07:16 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Parminder, Others (am also copying in the IRPC list).
>>>>
>>>> There is clearly still lots to debate,
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes Marianne, but the political moment of reckoning does not wait
>>> for all debates to conclude - debates that has now been happening
>>> for more than 10 years. The jurisdiction question is being
>>> considered formally "right now" in the transition process, as it is
>>> called, In a few months it will be formally declared that the global
>>> multi stakeholder community - which is supposed to includes me and
>>> you, and all the debators -- have concluded by full or rough
>>> consensus that the current jurisdictional status remains the best
>>> bet for ICANN. The 'decision' will be touted in our name. IGC 11
>>> years ago took a political position in the middle of debates -
>>> political activism requires that. 11 years hence the debates cannot
>>> be less mature then they were before - I am just wondering, what
>>> happened meanwhile... Well, isnt that too an important question by
>>> itself to ask, and explore, for activists and academics alike. Just
>>> clarifying what was the accent of my posting. Meanwhile, yes, more
>>> debates and articles and comments continue to remain welcome, and
>>> shd keep coming. But maybe, civil society's job includes some
>>> political role too!
>>>
>>> Meanwhile I do recommend to everyone to read this excellent series
>>> of IG related articles published in OpenDemocracy and coordinated by
>>> Marianne. https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri . Debates, academic
>>> exercises, and political action must all go together.
>>>
>>> best regards
>>>
>>> parminder
>>>
>>>> on the macro level of past and future ownership and control of the
>>>> strategically important aspects of the internet's infrastructure
>>>> (content being another matter altogether). To date the debates
>>>> about ICANN, positions for/against and all other shades, have
>>>> occurred on lists with well informed, and committed participants.
>>>>
>>>> To date there is little out there for an informed, wider public.
>>>> This is why comments on the Prakash piece
>>>> <https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann>,
>>>> or indeed others on this page that may relate to the spectrum of
>>>> issues that keeps all these lists alive and actively arriving in
>>>> our in=boxes, would help inform that wider audience.
>>>>
>>>> It is a key reason why I have been working with openDemocracy to
>>>> present these issues to a wider readership so all comments welcome
>>>> to the ICANN piece.
>>>>
>>>> Other articles, including a critical analysis of a UK-based
>>>> initiative for digital rights by Paul Bernal available at
>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri.
>>>>
>>>> warm wishes
>>>>
>>>> MF
>>>>
>>>> On 17/10/2016 14:07, parminder wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Monday 17 October 2016 05:20 PM, Marianne Franklin wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear Parminder
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for sending over this piece in a growing literature on
>>>>>> ICANN and it future.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just to note that Pranesh's less than celebratory analysis for
>>>>>> the ICANN transition has been published on the openDemocracy
>>>>>> series, Human Rights and the Internet, at
>>>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaLiberties/pranesh-prakash/jurisdiction-taboo-topic-at-icann.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Marianne,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, absolutely not at all celebratory! I had read it a few months
>>>>> back, and should have had it in my mind when I made that comment.
>>>>> But then, isnt it surprising that when two of the very few CS
>>>>> groups in India consider that not much has happened with the so
>>>>> called 'transition' in terms of loosening of US control over
>>>>> ICANN, there is simply no murmurs in the CS community globally to
>>>>> actually take this issue up - in a political manner, like making a
>>>>> statement and so on. I may repeat what I have said so many tomes
>>>>> earlier - in all the multistakeholder meetings that I saw
>>>>> organised in India in the transition processes it was always
>>>>> concluded that there are two key issues to sort out - an
>>>>> 'external' oversight mechanism, and jurisdiction issue. What we
>>>>> have is an oversight which is hardly external, and the
>>>>> jurisdiction issue is being completely buried. But still it seems
>>>>> that everyone -- more or less --  is just celebrating the
>>>>> 'transition' with no critical take being adopted.
>>>>>
>>>>> As Pranesh's article points out, seeking a host country agreement
>>>>> or in other words jurisdictional immunity for ICANN from the US
>>>>> was the demand of Internet Governance Caucus in 2005. The all
>>>>> round social- political importance of the domain name system has
>>>>> only greatly enhanced in the last 10 years, and so the US's
>>>>> jurisdictional control over it should be ever less acceptable --
>>>>> but why is no major civil society group today able to get up and
>>>>> say the same thing which IGC said and asked for in 2005?
>>>>> Especially when a process is actually taking place which is
>>>>> formally examining the jurisdiction question. I sometimes
>>>>> participate in that ICANN WG on jurisdiction, where every effort
>>>>> is on to bury this question - and i finds almost no civil society
>>>>> voice there.
>>>>>
>>>>> People here may want to ponder this question - has the US
>>>>> stranglehold on the IG discourse actually tightened since then -
>>>>> meaning WSIS in 2005? Or perhaps there could be other reasons,
>>>>> which I did not think of, and others can enlighten me on. (not
>>>>> addressed to you Marianne :), it is general)
>>>>>
>>>>> Parminder
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: Excuse me to cc this to IGC list, where a similar discussion
>>>>> is on... Those who respond may exercise discretion whether they
>>>>> want to respond to both elists or one of them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> best
>>>>>>
>>>>>> MF
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 15/10/2016 15:48, parminder wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>>>>> Subject:
>>>>>>> 	Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?
>>>>>>> Date:
>>>>>>> 	Sat, 15 Oct 2016 20:11:26 +0530
>>>>>>> From:
>>>>>>> 	parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>
>>>>>>> To:
>>>>>>> 	governance at lists.igcaucus.org <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>,
>>>>>>> &lt <" bestbits\""@lists.bestbits.net>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi All
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wrote this commentary piece in the Economic and Political
>>>>>>> Weekly of India on ICANN's oversight transition. For such an
>>>>>>> important and multi-faceted event, it is surprising that I have
>>>>>>> come across no article that is other than absolutely celebratory
>>>>>>> about it, and catches properly the different nuances that are
>>>>>>> involved. Such a monochromatic discourse in the global IG space
>>>>>>> is not a good indication. There is an especial lack of views
>>>>>>> from a progressive and social justice perspective, and from the
>>>>>>> geopolitical South, both of which I have tried to catch in this
>>>>>>> brief article. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   *Internet Governance: Is the Internet Really Free of US Control?*
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "The recent decision of the United States government to cede its
>>>>>>> control over the internet’s naming and addressing system to the
>>>>>>> Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a
>>>>>>> US-based international non-profit body, is heralded as a
>>>>>>> significant step towards the globalisation of internet’s core
>>>>>>> infrastructure. But with ICANN having no special jurisdictional
>>>>>>> immunity and subject to the whims of the judicial and
>>>>>>> legislative branches of the US government as well as many of its
>>>>>>> executive agencies, the decision seems more symbolic than
>>>>>>> meaningful."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.epw.in/journal/2016/42/web-exclusives/internet-governance.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Comments are welcome.
>>>>>>> parminder
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>>>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>>>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>>>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>>>>>> Department of Media & Communications
>>>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>>>>>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>>>>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>>>>> @GloComm
>>>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>>>>>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>>>>>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>>>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>>>>> @netrights
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet 
>>>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) 
>>>>>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) 
>>>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>>>>>
>>>>>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” 
>>>>>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>>>>>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>>>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>>>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>>>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>>>> Department of Media & Communications
>>>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>>>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>>>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>>>> @GloComm
>>>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>>>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>>>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>>>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>>>> @netrights
>>>>
>>>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet 
>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>>>
>>>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) 
>>>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# 
>>>>
>>>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) 
>>>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>>>
>>>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” 
>>>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>>>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Marianne Franklin, PhD
>> Professor of Global Media and Politics
>> Convener: Global Media & Transnational Communications Program
>> Goldsmiths (University of London)
>> Department of Media & Communications
>> New Cross, London SE14 6NW
>> Tel: +44 207 9197072
>> <m.i.franklin at gold.ac.uk>
>> @GloComm
>> http://www.gold.ac.uk/media-communications/staff/franklin/
>> Chair of the Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
>> Steering Committee/Former Co-Chair Internet Rights & Principles Coalition )
>> www.internetrightsandprinciples.org
>> @netrights
>>
>> Special Series Editor, Human Rights and the Internet 
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/hri
>>
>> Digital Dilemmas: Power, Resistance and the Internet (Oxford University Press) 
>> http://global.oup.com/academic/product/digital-dilemmas-9780199982707?cc=nl&lang=en&q=Digital%20dilemmas&tab=reviews# 
>>
>> Championing Human Rights on the Internet (I-VI) 
>> https://www.opendemocracy.net/marianne-franklin/championing-human-rights-on-internet-part-six-summing-up-too-much-or-not-enough
>>
>> “What does (the Study of) World Politics Sound Like?” 
>> co-authored with Matt Davies in World Politics and Popular Culture: Theories, Methods, Pedagogies
>> http://www.e-ir.info/2015/04/22/edited-collection-popular-culture-and-world-politics/
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161022/eaae4aa9/attachment.htm>

From jmalcolm at eff.org  Sat Oct 22 13:13:00 2016
From: jmalcolm at eff.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 10:13:00 -0700
Subject: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil society
 meeting (very limited travel support)
In-Reply-To: <Ld2IRxj-6erVwsHjorEiyvmLqcBSyDu8V5zCZqTMClCUx1pNZznMKy6Oz9Ci33JPvIuwsr6vD9iExzZL4KIfhcd6Sqv4JvJRIo7rhw7GQQY=@ferdeline.com>
References: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>
 <8c29b7a2-bd29-5c85-c0c0-8a6696dcf17a@itforchange.net>
 <Ld2IRxj-6erVwsHjorEiyvmLqcBSyDu8V5zCZqTMClCUx1pNZznMKy6Oz9Ci33JPvIuwsr6vD9iExzZL4KIfhcd6Sqv4JvJRIo7rhw7GQQY=@ferdeline.com>
Message-ID: <e6da8779-6c02-3bb6-7513-4d3ddfeefb33@eff.org>

So far we have $1000 each from EFF, ICANN and ICANN NCUC but we are
trying to raise more, since that clearly isn't going to go very far. 
The more we raise, the more people can be supported.

There was a "subject to funding" checkbox in the registration form
Parminder which I guess you missed.  I will set it for you.

On 21/10/16 10:40 pm, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
> I think this is a very good question — what is the source of funding
> here? (I ask out of curiosity, as I have been fortunate enough to
> secure funding to enable my participation already.) Thanks for all
> that you do, Jeremy.
>
> Ayden Férdeline
> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil
>> society meeting (very limited travel support)
>> Local Time: 22 October 2016 5:25 AM
>> UTC Time: 22 October 2016 04:25
>> From: parminder at itforchange.net
>> To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>>
>>
>> Jeremy
>>
>> I dont have funding for attending the IGF and will like to apply. I
>> registered through the link you gave but could not see any place to
>> make a funding application.
>>
>> Meanwhile, would it also be possible to share the source of funding.
>>
>> Thanks, parminder
>>
>>
>> On Friday 21 October 2016 10:44 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 25 October 1300 UTC the organizers of this year's pre-IGF
>>> meeting will be closing off registrations by those who are requesting
>>> travel support (if you're not, then you have an extra month).  We have
>>> only a tiny amount of money for travel support anyway, and the criteria
>>> are as follows:
>>>
>>> 10 points if you will be contributing to a session
>>> 10 points for high engagement in one or multiple networks
>>> 10 points if you are from a developing country
>>> 10 points if your net need for funding is $500 or less
>>> - 10 points if you can come without funding support
>>> 15 points if you have a chairperson or other key facilitation role in
>>> cross-network civil society coordination activities such as CSCG.
>>>
>>> Here is where you can register:
>>>
>>> http://bestbits.net/events/joint-cs-2016/If you want to contribute to a session, please let me know and I'll put
>>> you in touch with the right people.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161022/51c4fc63/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161022/51c4fc63/attachment.sig>

From parminder at itforchange.net  Sat Oct 22 23:00:46 2016
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 08:30:46 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil society
 meeting (very limited travel support)
In-Reply-To: <e6da8779-6c02-3bb6-7513-4d3ddfeefb33@eff.org>
References: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>
 <8c29b7a2-bd29-5c85-c0c0-8a6696dcf17a@itforchange.net>
 <Ld2IRxj-6erVwsHjorEiyvmLqcBSyDu8V5zCZqTMClCUx1pNZznMKy6Oz9Ci33JPvIuwsr6vD9iExzZL4KIfhcd6Sqv4JvJRIo7rhw7GQQY=@ferdeline.com>
 <e6da8779-6c02-3bb6-7513-4d3ddfeefb33@eff.org>
Message-ID: <ed6ad4e4-f56f-d539-9730-780f22659683@itforchange.net>



On Saturday 22 October 2016 10:43 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>
> So far we have $1000 each from EFF, ICANN and ICANN NCUC but we are
> trying to raise more, since that clearly isn't going to go very far. 
> The more we raise, the more people can be supported.
>

Thanks.
> There was a "subject to funding" checkbox in the registration form
> Parminder which I guess you missed.  I will set it for you.

I did check it if that is all what was needed ... best, parminder
>
> On 21/10/16 10:40 pm, Ayden Férdeline wrote:
>> I think this is a very good question — what is the source of funding
>> here? (I ask out of curiosity, as I have been fortunate enough to
>> secure funding to enable my participation already.) Thanks for all
>> that you do, Jeremy.
>>
>> Ayden Férdeline
>> linkedin.com/in/ferdeline <http://www.linkedin.com/in/ferdeline>
>>
>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] Reminder to register for pre-IGF civil
>>> society meeting (very limited travel support)
>>> Local Time: 22 October 2016 5:25 AM
>>> UTC Time: 22 October 2016 04:25
>>> From: parminder at itforchange.net
>>> To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>>>
>>>
>>> Jeremy
>>>
>>> I dont have funding for attending the IGF and will like to apply. I
>>> registered through the link you gave but could not see any place to
>>> make a funding application.
>>>
>>> Meanwhile, would it also be possible to share the source of funding.
>>>
>>> Thanks, parminder
>>>
>>>
>>> On Friday 21 October 2016 10:44 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday 25 October 1300 UTC the organizers of this year's pre-IGF
>>>> meeting will be closing off registrations by those who are requesting
>>>> travel support (if you're not, then you have an extra month).  We have
>>>> only a tiny amount of money for travel support anyway, and the criteria
>>>> are as follows:
>>>>
>>>> 10 points if you will be contributing to a session
>>>> 10 points for high engagement in one or multiple networks
>>>> 10 points if you are from a developing country
>>>> 10 points if your net need for funding is $500 or less
>>>> - 10 points if you can come without funding support
>>>> 15 points if you have a chairperson or other key facilitation role in
>>>> cross-network civil society coordination activities such as CSCG.
>>>>
>>>> Here is where you can register:
>>>>
>>>> http://bestbits.net/events/joint-cs-2016/If you want to contribute to a session, please let me know and I'll put
>>>> you in touch with the right people.
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
> -- 
> Jeremy Malcolm
> Senior Global Policy Analyst
> Electronic Frontier Foundation
> https://eff.org
> jmalcolm at eff.org
>
> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>
> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>
> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
> PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161023/e4cf53e3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 901 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161023/e4cf53e3/attachment.sig>

From jefsey at jefsey.com  Sun Oct 23 11:38:08 2016
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (Jefsey)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 17:38:08 +0200
Subject: [bestbits] TitaDYN
In-Reply-To: <ed6ad4e4-f56f-d539-9730-780f22659683@itforchange.net>
References: <5e7eae82-fc45-56c5-70fa-75dfae9273ce@eff.org>
 <8c29b7a2-bd29-5c85-c0c0-8a6696dcf17a@itforchange.net>
 <Ld2IRxj-6erVwsHjorEiyvmLqcBSyDu8V5zCZqTMClCUx1pNZznMKy6Oz9Ci33JPvIuwsr6vD9iExzZL4KIfhcd6Sqv4JvJRIo7rhw7GQQY=@ferdeline.com>
 <e6da8779-6c02-3bb6-7513-4d3ddfeefb33@eff.org>
 <ed6ad4e4-f56f-d539-9730-780f22659683@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <mailman.176.1642081936.12520.bestbits@lists.igcaucus.org>

Interested in knowing if anyone noticed the attack on DYN's and 
thought about its implications?
jfc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161023/27dde401/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Sun Oct 23 21:31:44 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2016 22:31:44 -0300
Subject: [bestbits] IFF2017 Call for proposals and IFF Diversity and
 Inclusion Fund
Message-ID: <CAMokdMzW6j8f31WVBmRALG5fcOVW4AS1OenUo7KAEZggHwcpDw@mail.gmail.com>

Call is open to participate in the 2017 Internet Freedom Festival ,
we'd love for you to submit your session or workshop ideas to be part
of the festival program!

The *final deadline* for submission on Monday, November 28th, 2016.
We’re expecting a big turnout, so submit your session soon!

Host a Session —> https://internetfreedomfestival.org/host-a-session/

Furthermore, via funds raised for the IFF Diversity & Inclusion Fund,
the IFF is now able to offer a limited amount of travel assistance to
the event, to participants whose session proposals are selected for
the festival program!

IFF Diversity & Inclusion Fund ->
https://internetfreedomfestival.org/internet-freedom-festival-diversity-inclusion-fund/

The IFF is a gathering made for the community - and we want to ensure
that your voice and ideas are heard. So think big, be innovative, be
creative, and send in your session ideas by November 28th!

Best,

Renata
IFF2017 Fellow - Regions and Groups Track

From roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca  Tue Oct 25 06:59:35 2016
From: roberta.lentz at mcgill.ca (Becky Lentz)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:59:35 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] New CIVICUS Monitor tool - Re: Over 3 billion people
 living in countries where civic freedoms are violated
Message-ID: <D434B325.5E21D%roberta.lentz@mcgill.ca>

This may be of interestŠ


>  Over 3 billion people living in countries where civic freedoms are violated ­
> New CIVICUS Monitor tool
>  
>   
>     
>     
>    
>    
>     
>   Over 3 billion people living in countries where civic freedoms are violated
> ­ New CIVICUS Monitor tool
>   View this in your browser
> <http://us6.campaign-archive2.com/?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id=7920cd4fb5&e
> =b4767c1de4>     
>    
>                  
>     
>    
>    
>     
>   English <#English>  | Français <#French>  | Español <#Espanol>
>  
> Over 3 billion people living in countries where civic freedoms are violated ­
> New CIVICUS Monitor tool
> 
> More than three billion people live in countries where the rights to protest,
> organize and speak out are currently being violated according to the CIVICUS
> Monitor 
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=682d7b2c83&e=b4767c1de4> , the first-ever online tool to track and compare
> civic freedoms on a global scale.
> 
> What is the #CIVICUSMonitor?
> The CIVICUS Monitor
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=9dba46dd88&e=b4767c1de4>  provides near real-time updates on human rights
> violations and the status of civic space for every country in the world based
> on how well they uphold the three fundamental rights that enable people to act
> collectively and make change: freedom of association, freedom of peaceful
> assembly, and freedom of expression.
> 
> What are the findings?We are seeing violations of civic freedoms in every
> region of the world, but these are more concentrated in Africa, the Middle
> East and the Americas. Of the 104 countries rated, 16 are closed, 32
> repressed, 21 obstructed, 26 narrowed and 9 are open, equating to more than
> 3billion people whose civic freedoms are being violated in one form or another
> around the world.
> 
> The CIVICUS Monitor also documents attacks on civil society with updates every
> weekday. Analysis of more than 200 updates to the CIVICUS Monitor over the
> past four months has found:
> €   Detention of activists (68 cases), use of excessive force against
> protesters (62 cases) and attacks on journalists (37 cases) were the three
> most common violations of civic freedoms.
> €    Activists were most likely to be detained over criticism of authorities
> (37%), human rights monitoring (29%) or political divisions or conflict (16%).
> €    Excessive force was most likely to be used against protesters who
> criticise government decisions or corruption (29%), call for action on human
> rights abuses (20%) or call for basic social or economic freedoms (20%).
> €    Journalists were most likely to be attacked covering protests (26%) or
> conflicts (19%), or because of their ethnicity, religious or political
> affiliation (14%).
> €    In the vast majority of cases, the state is the perpetrator of
> violations. 
> 
> CIVICUS hopes the #CIVICUSMonitor will be an invaluable tool allowing
> activists, journalists, civil society organisations, academic institutions and
> the general public to assess how well their governments are enabling civic
> freedoms, as enshrined in national constitutions and guaranteed in
> international law, as well as through intergovernmental commitments such as
> the Sustainable Development Goals
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =abcad9bdb0&e=b4767c1de4> , Open Government Partnership
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=22489b1799&e=b4767c1de4>  and the Busan Partnership for Effective
> Development Cooperation
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =094e813c55&e=b4767c1de4> .
> 
> Visit the site 
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =20010280fc&e=b4767c1de4>  to find your country rating, search the database by
> violations or rights and send us your feedback through the Have Your Say
> button on each country page.
> 
> Also see our #CIVICUSMonitor Media and Social Media Toolkit
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =c6ff22b01c&e=b4767c1de4>  for resources that include social media messages,
> graphics, official press materials and summary of the findings to help you
> spread the word in your networks.
> 
> For more information please contact monitor at civicus.org
> <mailto:monitor at civicus.org> .
> 
> In Solidarity, 
> The #CIVICUSMonitor Team
>  
> 
> 
> Plus de trois milliards de personnes dans le monde vivent dans des pays où les
> libertés civiques sont violées ­ Nouvel outil de mesure, le CIVICUS Monitor
> 
> Plus de trois milliards de personnes vivent dans des pays où les libertés
> fondamentales de réunion, d'association et d'expression sont actuellement
> violées selon le CIVICUS Monitor
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =3b3dbd2476&e=b4767c1de4> , le premier outil de recherche en ligne qui suit et
> compare les droits civiques à l¹échelle mondiale.
> 
> Qu¹est-ce que le #CIVICUSMonitor ?
> Le CIVICUS Monitor (présentation en français)
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =ca36c26ac9&e=b4767c1de4>  vous permettra d'avoir accès à des mises à jour
> quotidiennes sur les violations des droits de l¹Homme et du statut de l'espace
> civique dans chaque pays du monde. Il se base sur une évaluation de comment
> les trois libertés fondamentales d'association, de réunion pacifique et
> d'expression qui permettent à tout peuple d¹agir collectivement et de faire
> changer les choses sont respectées ou non.
> 
> Quels en sont les résultats initiaux ?Nous constatons qu¹il y a de sévères
> violations des libertés civiques dans tous les continents, mais que celles-ci
> se concentrent surtout en Afrique, au Moyen-Orient et dans les Amériques. Sur
> les 104 pays actuellement évalués, 16 pays ont un espace civique fermé, 32
> pays réprimé, 21 obstrué, 26 réduit, et 9 ouvert, ce qui signifie que plus de
> 3,2 milliards de personnes vivent dans des pays où l¹une des 3 libertés
> civiques est violée d¹une façon ou d¹une autre.
> 
> Le CIVICUS Monitor documente également les attaques contre la société civile
> en fournissant des mises à jour chaque jour ouvré. L'analyse de plus de 200
> mises à jour pour le CIVICUS Monitor au cours des quatre derniers mois révèle
> que :
> €    La détention d'activistes (68 cas), le recours à la force excessive
> contre des manifestants (62 cas) et les attaques contre des journalistes (37
> cas) sont les violations des libertés civiques les plus fréquentes.
> €    Les activistes sont le plus souvent détenus pour avoir critiqué les
> autorités (37 %), suivi le respect des droits de l'Homme dans leur pays (29 %)
> ou pour des raisons de divisions ou de conflits politiques (16 %).
> €    Une force excessive a été le plus souvent exercée contre des
> manifestations qui critiquaient les décisions ou la corruption du gouvernement
> (29 %), pour des appels à l'action contre les violations des droits de l'Homme
> (20 %) ou pour avoir lancé un appel en faveur des libertés sociales ou
> économiques fondamentales (20 %).
> €    Les journalistes ont été le plus souvent attaqué(e)s lorsqu'ils
> couvraient des manifestations (26 %) ou des conflits (19 %) ou en raison de
> leur appartenance ethnique, religieuse ou pour des raisons d'affiliation
> politique (14 %).
> €    Dans la grande majorité des cas, l'État est l'auteur de ces violations.
> 
> CIVICUS espère que le #CIVICUSMonitor sera un outil précieux permettant aux
> activistes, aux journalistes, aux organisations de la société civile, aux
> institutions académiques et au grand public d'évaluer dans quelle mesure leur
> gouvernement favorise et respecte les libertés civiques ou non, tel que cela
> est inscrit dans les constitutions nationales de par le monde et garanti par
> le droit international, ainsi que par le biais d¹engagements
> intergouvernementaux tels que les Objectifs de développement durable
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =2c53585348&e=b4767c1de4> , le Partenariat pour un gouvernement transparent
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =3c5bcc39f9&e=b4767c1de4>  et le Partenariat de Busan pour une coopération
> efficace au développement
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=79b9eca024&e=b4767c1de4> .
> 
> Visitez le site internet
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =a48ce31c65&e=b4767c1de4>  pour connaitre le classement de votre pays,
> cherchez la base de données par violations ou par libertés, et dites-nous ce
> que vous en pensez via le bouton ŒHave Your Say¹ sur chaque page de pays.
> 
> Vous pouvez aussi consulter notre boite à outil pour la presse et réseaux
> sociaux 
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=93219ad4c9&e=b4767c1de4>  pour diffuser les résultats, graphiques et autres
> documents du CIVICUS Monitor.
> 
> Pour plus d¹information, contactez-nous à monitor at civicus.org
> <mailto:monitor at civicus.org> .
> 
> En solidarité,
> L¹équipe du #CIVICUSMonitor
>  
> 
> 
> Más de tres mil millones de personas viven en países donde se violan las
> libertades cívicas ­ Nueva herramienta de monitoreo, el CIVICUS Monitor
> 
> Más de tres mil millones de personas viven en países en los que los derechos a
> protestar, a organizarse y a expresarse son actualmente violados, según lo
> comprueba el CIVICUS Monitor
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=47efa60974&e=b4767c1de4> , la primera herramienta de investigación online en
> su género para monitorear y comparar las libertades cívicas a escala global.
> 
> ¿Qué es el #CIVICUSMonitor?
> El CIVICUS Monitor (presentación en español)
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=5afaa24170&e=b4767c1de4>  es una herramienta de investigación construida por
> la sociedad civil para compartir datos confiables y actualizados sobre el
> espacio cívico en todos los países. Esta nueva plataforma le permitirá acceder
> a actualizaciones en vivo de y sobre la sociedad civil alrededor del mundo,
> rastrear amenazas al espacio cívico y aprender sobre las maneras en las que
> las libertades fundamentales de asociación, asamblea pacífica y expresión
> están siendo ejercidas o amenazadas.
> 
> ¿Cuáles son los resultados iniciales?
> 
> Constatamos que hay violaciones de las libertades cívicas en todos los
> continentes, pero que se concentran sobretodo en Africa, Medio-Oriente y en
> las Américas. De los 104 países que han sido clasificados ahora, se ha
> encontrado que el espacio cívico en 16 países está cerrado, en 32 países está
> represivo, en 21 obstruido, en 26 estrecho y en 9 países está abierto, lo cual
> significa que más de 3 mil millones de personas en el mundo viven en países
> donde el espacio cívico está cerrado o es represivo.
> 
> El CIVICUS Monitor también documenta ataques a la sociedad civil con
> actualizaciones cada día de la semana. El análisis de las más de 200
> actualizaciones recibidas para el CIVICUS Monitor en los últimos cuatro meses
> muestran que:
> €    La detención de activistas (68 casos), el uso excesivo de la fuerza
> contra manifestantes (62 casos) y ataques a periodistas (37 casos) fueron las
> tres violaciones más frecuentas a las libertades civiles.
> €    La/os activistas tuvieron altas probabilidades de ser detenida/os debido
> a sus críticas a las autoridades (37%), por su defensa de los derechos humanos
> (29%) o por divisiones políticas o conflictos (16%).
> €    El uso de la fuerza excesiva fue una probabilidad alta contra
> manifestantes que criticaron decisiones gubernamentales o corrupción (29%),
> que llamaron a la acción por violaciones contra los derechos humanos (20%) o
> que hicieron un llamado por las libertades sociales y económicas básicas
> (20%).
> €    Las y los periodistas estuvieron altamente expuesta/os a ser atacada/os
> mientras cubrían protestas (26%) o conflictos (19%), o por a su origen étnico,
> religión o afiliación política (14%).
> €    En la gran mayoría de los casos, el Estado es el autor de las dichas
> violaciones.
> 
> CIVICUS espera que el CIVICUS Monitor se convierta en una valiosa herramienta
> que permita a activistas, periodistas, organizaciones de la sociedad civil,
> instituciones académicas y el público en general evaluar si sus gobiernos
> están permitiendo o reprimiendo las libertades civiles, consagradas en las
> constituciones nacionales en todo el mundo y también garantizadas en el
> derecho internacional y a través de compromisos intergubernamentales tales
> como los Objetivos de Desarrollo Sostenible
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=675eefcdea&e=b4767c1de4> , la Alianza para el Gobierno Abierto
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =5f2422a34a&e=b4767c1de4>  y la Alianza de Busán para la Cooperación Eficaz al
> Desarrollo 
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=ea7b8f9809&e=b4767c1de4> .
> 
> Visite el sitio web
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =e2efc599ce&e=b4767c1de4> , y descubra la clasificación de sus país, busque en
> la base de datos violaciones y derechos, y háganos saber lo que piensa vía el
> botón ŒHave Your Say¹ en cada página de país.
> 
> También puede consultar nuestra caja de herramientas para la prensa y las
> redes sociales 
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=756c2cebb9&e=b4767c1de4>  difundir los resultados, gráficos y otros
> documentos del CIVICUS Monitor.
> 
> Para mas información, contacte-nos en monitor at civicus.org
> <mailto:monitor at civicus.org> .
> 
> En solidaridad,
> El equipo del #CIVICUSMonitor
>  
>                
>     
>    
>    
>    
>    
>    
>      
>    
>    
>    
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =d42fd0f400&e=b4767c1de4>    Facebook
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =ab13ff71a1&e=b4767c1de4>
>    
>    
>    
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =437f0e2562&e=b4767c1de4>    Twitter
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=d8afd2c14a&e=b4767c1de4>
>    
>    
>    
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =59e99f5e62&e=b4767c1de4>    CIVICUS.org
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =1bd763535f&e=b4767c1de4>
>    
>    
>    
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=69ab1c807a&e=b4767c1de4>    YouTube
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/track/click?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id
> =8e0d7dd24d&e=b4767c1de4>
>     
>    
>    
>     
>   Copyright © 2016 CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation, All
> rights reserved.
>  You are receiving this email, because (a) you are a citizen/organisational
> member of CIVICUS (b) you requested that we add you to our mailimg list via
> email, telephone or (c) you filled out a subscription form on our website
> 
> Our mailing address is:
> CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation24 Gwigwi Mwrebi Street
> Newtown
> Johannesburg, Gauteng  2001 South Africa
> 
> Add us to your address book
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/vcard?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id=1b19f
> 1efbc> 
> 
> 
> unsubscribe from this list
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage1.com/unsubscribe?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&i
> d=1b19f1efbc&e=b4767c1de4&c=7920cd4fb5>     update subscription preferences
> <http://civicus.us6.list-manage.com/profile?u=9283ff78aa53cccd2800739dc&id=1b1
> 9f1efbc&e=b4767c1de4>
> 
>                  
>  
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161025/36a36def/attachment.htm>

From carolina.rossini at gmail.com  Tue Oct 25 10:21:25 2016
From: carolina.rossini at gmail.com (Carolina Rossini)
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 10:21:25 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] NEWS and OPEN POSITION @ PK
Message-ID: <CAK-FJAdmQa8ZkS5jx7CzP+=KRfL3_C=xnwZSiR3R0KVrVxhHGQ@mail.gmail.com>

### sorry for cross-posting ###

Dear friends and colleagues,

After 3 years at Public Knowledge and over a decade in civil society and
academia, I decided it was time for a change. So, I've recently accepted an
offer to join the Global Connectivity Policy team at Facebook, here in DC.
I’ll be working on an expanding team alongside Monica Desai, Robert Pepper,
Kevin Martin and other amazing professionals. I will be working on issues
like open spectrum, OTT, net neutrality, open hardware and more. I hope you
will all continue to engage with me and, when necessary, criticize me in a
collegial manner ;-)

I will remain active in these conversations in my new role, and plan to
keep most of the advisory board positions I have now. I can assure you my
interest in civil society and the public interest remains strong, and I
want to thank you all for the collaboration and trust over the years and I
hope that sentiment will still prevail in our work moving forward. I also
want to thank Gene for all the mentorship and friendship over the years. He
is a force for good in our community.

I am sorry I could not talk face to face to many of you as I wanted, but we
need to keep things moving. *Thus, I also want to share with you the newly
open position at PK for an international spot.* I loved my time at PK, and
this role would be a wonderful opportunity for many of you. If you have any
questions, just follow-up on the email there listed or directly with Gene.

Moving forward, you can use this email for contact. My PK email will be
terminated on November 1st.

Cheers,

Carolina
-- 

# # #
# • #
# # #
*Carolina Rossini *
Vice President, International Policy and Strategy
+ 1 (617) 697 9389 | skype: carolrossini | @carolinarossini
PGP ID:  0xEC81015C
*PublicKnowledge* | @publicknowledge <https://twitter.com/publicknowledge>
 | www.publicknowledge.org
1818 N St. NW, Suite 410 | Washington, DC 20036
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161025/a68d00c0/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Director, Global Policy.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 64023 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161025/a68d00c0/attachment.docx>

From chinmayiarun at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 15:06:50 2016
From: chinmayiarun at gmail.com (Chinmayi Arun)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 00:36:50 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] CCG Report: Indian stakeholders at IG fora (2011-2015)
Message-ID: <CACu5V_s4Fba=Cj3TssT5urAf4twK-9gMNyKfRgB8KBGiNrn_Nw@mail.gmail.com>

*Apologies for cross posting*

Dear All,

This is to share our first report on India’s engagement with Global
Internet Governance institutions
<http://ccgdelhi.org/doc/%28CCG-NLU%29%20Multistakeholderism%20in%20Action%20-%20Analysing%20Indian%20Engagement%20at%20Global%20Internet%20Governance%20Institutions%20%282011-15%29.pdf>.
The report is authored by my colleagues Puneeth Nagaraj and Aarti Bhavana.
It analyses Indian stakeholders’ participation in the WSIS+10 review, ICANN
and the IGF MAG over five years (2011-2015).

This report reveals interesting trends. One is that Indian engagement with
these processes is on the rise, although it is still impeded by a lack of
resources. The other interestingly, is that the Indian private sector
participates very little when compared to other stakeholders.

We plan to cover more institutions in our next round of research and would
be grateful for your feedback. I hope that you will write to me, or to my
colleagues (puneeth.nagaraj at nludelhi.ac.in and aarti.bhavana at nludelhi.ac.in)
with any comments or questions that you might have.

Warm regards,

Chinmayi

Chinmayi Arun | Executive Director

Centre for Communication Governance | National Law University, Delhi
| Sector-14, Dwarka, New Delhi - 110078 | Cell: (+91) 971-770-2630 | Fax:
(+91) 11-280-34256 | www.ccgdelhi.org .  <http://goog_561379142/>
www.nludelhi.ac.in | Twitter: @chinmayiarun <https://twitter.com/CCGDelhi>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161006/9d0f4f7e/attachment.htm>

From raquino at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 17:41:45 2016
From: raquino at gmail.com (Renata Aquino Ribeiro)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 03:11:45 +0530
Subject: [bestbits] Pre IGF2016 Joint CS Meeting - Young Latin American
 Women Declaration: Enabling access to empower young women and build a
 feminist Internet Governance
Message-ID: <CAMokdMw4OSYpF9qRPwQV8azA8-_EB=qUCu6qD7_=JP=zbFwQ6Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi

Sharing a background paper registered in the Joint CS Meeting
Background Papers space

"The Young Latin American Women Declaration aims to present our views
and perspectives on the present Internet and also to appeal for an
inclusive work that reflects not only about women, but also includes
our perspectives not only as native and active participants of the
Internet, involved in Internet governance and interested in fighting
for a free and open Internet for everyone." [Excerpt}

Authored by the Youth Observatory, organization which was in Youth LAC
IGF, LAC IGF and has a number of projects on youth and internet
governance, also a collaborative effort w/ BPF Gender and Access

The declaration will be a topic also of the breakout session on
"Regional Engagement in Internet Governance in LAC and developing
countries"

Young Latin American Women Declaration: Enabling access to empower
young women and build a feminist Internet Governance

http://bestbits.net/youth-observatory-statement-on-building-a-feminist-internet-governance/

Joint CS Meeting registration

http://bestbits.net/events/joint-cs-2016/

Session on  "Regional Engagement in Internet Governance in LAC and
developing countries"  #IGRegional

http://bit.ly/igregionaligf

Thanks

Renata

From mzmmlh at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 09:11:23 2016
From: mzmmlh at gmail.com (Muzammil Hussain)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 09:11:23 -0400
Subject: [bestbits] University of Michigan/SSRC Doctoral Institute on Global
 Media and Communication (May 2017)
Message-ID: <CAKLujTdHGj_COAnXpo6Xi4pP0QUHFuSTxOrxw588W-13GZo0tw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear friends and colleagues: Michigan's Global Media Studies Initiative
with the Social Science Research Council will hold an inter-disciplinary
doctoral institute in May 2017, deadline for applicants is January 2017 --
please share with potential applicants; more details below and attached.

--
Dr. Muzammil M. Hussain | mmhussain.net
Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Studies
Faculty Associate, Institute for Social Research
The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor


http://www.ssrc.org/events/view/university-of-michigan-ssrc-doctoral-institute-on-global-media-and-communication/

University of Michigan/SSRC Doctoral Institute on Global Media and
Communication
May 18th–20th 2017
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
http://gmsi.comm.lsa.umich.edu/
SUBMISSION DEADLINE: JANUARY 10, 2017

The Global Media Studies Initiative at the University of Michigan in
partnership with the Social Science Research Council’s Transregional
Virtual Research Institute, “Media, Activism and the New Political:
InterAsian Perspectives,” is pleased to announce the inaugural Doctoral
Institute on Global Media and Communication. We aim to facilitate and
advance rigorous inter-disciplinary doctoral dissertation research on
global media and communication in a range of contexts worldwide.

We seek to create a sustained and diverse network of advanced graduate
students by providing the opportunity to give and receive critical feedback
on dissertations in progress.


Goals
By bringing together PhD students from media and communication programs
(and allied disciplines) from around the world, this doctoral institute
creates a space to discuss and develop critical approaches to the study of
global media and communication. The goals of the institute are as follows:

Deepen participants’ theoretical and empirical foundations for the study of
media and globalization.
Introduce applicants to the intersections of area studies and global media
and communication studies.
Foster comparative and cross- and trans-regional research, particularly
focused on InterAsian and Afro-Asian perspectives.
Facilitate logistical preparation for field research, archival research,
and other forms of
qualitative and critical research. Develop a diverse network of advanced
graduate
students working on their dissertations.

Topics
We are interested in receiving applications from PhD students from
communication, media studies, and related fields who are embarking on their
dissertation research in the areas of global and transnational media,
broadly defined. Productive topics may be area-specific or investigate
mobilities across countries and/or regions; consider the rapidly changing
technological landscape in shaping new temporal media rhythms and spatial
flows of information; look at global transformations in production cultures
and industry logics; design, entrepreneurship, and maker/tech cultures;
emergent user/audience practices; the history and contemporary politics of
media infrastructures and governance; media texts, genres, and trans-media
flows. This list is not exhaustive but intended to indicate the scope of
projects of interest to the institute.


Format
The 2-day Doctoral Institute will include intensive feedback sessions on
each participant's dissertation project, including both faculty mentors and
peers, and an opportunity to distill the project in response to this
feedback. We will be running methods workshops, writing sessions, and a
workshop on academic publishing. By the end of the Institute, participants
will have had the opportunity to hone their dissertation research
questions, consolidate their methodological approach, and keep in focus
their longer-term publication goals.


Faculty Mentors
The institute will be led by a small group of University of Michigan
Communication Studies faculty and two other leading global media scholars
invited to serve as faculty mentors. Participants will also have an
opportunity to attend a publishing institute led by Mary Francis, Editorial
Director of Michigan Publishing. 2017 Institute Faculty include:

Aswin Punathambekar (University of Michigan)
Katherine Sender (University of Michigan)
Derek Vaillant (University of Michigan)
Paula Chakravartty (New York University)
Jonathan Gray (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

To Apply
A cohort of 10 PhD students will be chosen from an open, international pool
of applicants through a competitive selection process. Applicants must have
at least drafted a dissertation research proposal, but applications are
also welcome from doctoral students in the early phases of writing their
dissertations.

Application Deadline: January 10, 2017 | Notification of Decision: By
February 15, 2017

All applicants must submit the following materials via email to
globalcomm at umich.edu:

 Cover Letter (must include reasons for applying to the institute; summary
of research agenda; description of academic preparation).
 Current Curriculum Vitae (CV).
 Narrative description of the dissertation topic (no more than 8
double-spaced typed pages + a 2-page bibliography).
 Letter of Recommendation from Primary Advisor and/or Dissertation Chair:
Send directly to globalcomm at umich.edu, with subject line: Recommendation –
2017 Michigan Doctoral Institute Applicant.
Funding: We will be able to provide three nights’ accommodations and meals,
and partial
need-based travel funds. Students are encouraged to approach their home
institutions for
additional support.

Questions? Contact globalcomm at umich.edu



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Aswin Punathambekar <aswinp at umich.edu>
Date: Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 4:43 AM
Subject: Michigan/SSRC Doctoral Institute on Global Media & Communication
To: "communication.faculty at umich.edu None" <communication.faculty at umich.edu>,
"communication.graduates at umich.edu None" <communication.graduates at umich.edu>,
comm-phd-alumni <commstudies-phd-alumni at umich.edu>


Dear colleagues,

I am writing to let you know that the* Global Media Studies Initiative*, in
partnership with the Social Science Research Council, has planned a
Doctoral Institute on Global Media and Communication starting next year
(May 18-20, 2017).

I've attached the flyer with this email (pdf) and the details are here as
well:
http://www.ssrc.org/events/view/university-of-michigan-ssrc-
doctoral-institute-on-global-media-and-communication/

I'd be grateful if you could circulate this. We would like to bring a truly
diverse group of students to Michigan next year for this workshop.

On behalf of the GMSI crew,
-aswin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161007/ba486f59/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Michigan-SSRC-Global-Media-Institute.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 90099 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161007/ba486f59/attachment.pdf>

From sheetal at gp-digital.org  Fri Oct  7 14:36:57 2016
From: sheetal at gp-digital.org (Sheetal Kumar)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 19:36:57 +0100
Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
Message-ID: <CAK78muR9+Ub==91Z-er7C9XFVP2wLMgywpE1KUQokstm30CYvg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

We are writing to let you know of the outcome of the election for CSCG
chairs <http://internetgov-cs.org/procedures>.

With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG
<http://internetgov-cs.org/>), which works to ensure a co-ordinated civil
society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society
appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new chairpersons team:
Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected unanimously, and they
will serve as equal Co-chairs.

This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair of
CSCG, as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for serving
another term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his skillful leadership
over the past years.

Any questions do let us know!

Best,
Sheetal & Poncelet
-- 
*Sheetal Kumar*
Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161007/e3b8684f/attachment.htm>

From ekenyanito at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 14:52:35 2016
From: ekenyanito at gmail.com (Ephraim Percy Kenyanito)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 21:52:35 +0300
Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
Message-ID: <CAHwnKeFDCqNd_0zFzZoWiKesLnvAWYbs23+_tkLa-2zRaHYsbQ@mail.gmail.com>

Congratulations to both of them!!

--

Best Regards,
*Ephraim Percy Kenyanito*
Website: https://ephraimkenyanito.com/
Twitter: @ekenyanito
PGP Fingerprint: B0FA394AF73DEB7AA1FDC7360CFED26DE6BA8DC1



> ​                ​
> --------------------
> From: Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org>
> Date: 7 October 2016 at 21:36
> Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
> To: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> We are writing to let you know of the outcome of the election for CSCG
> chairs <http://internetgov-cs.org/procedures>.
>
> With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG
> <http://internetgov-cs.org/>), which works to ensure a co-ordinated civil
> society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society
> appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new chairpersons team:
> Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected unanimously, and they
> will serve as equal Co-chairs.
>
> This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair of
> CSCG, as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for serving
> another term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his skillful leadership
> over the past years.
>
> Any questions do let us know!
>
> Best,
> Sheetal & Poncelet
> --
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161007/7bf424e8/attachment.htm>

From wisdom.dk at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 15:45:14 2016
From: wisdom.dk at gmail.com (Wisdom Donkor)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2016 19:45:14 +0000
Subject: [bestbits] Appointment of CSCG Chairpersons
In-Reply-To: <CAK78muR9+Ub==91Z-er7C9XFVP2wLMgywpE1KUQokstm30CYvg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAK78muR9+Ub==91Z-er7C9XFVP2wLMgywpE1KUQokstm30CYvg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAU+vPGPByfKVKhgq1i2K5HVnxLLw8U=y0EnvFv=PdEraFTO4A@mail.gmail.com>

Amalia and Richard, congratulations to you.

Kindly let us no where the party is taken place.

Cheers

On Friday, October 7, 2016, Sheetal Kumar <sheetal at gp-digital.org> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We are writing to let you know of the outcome of the election for CSCG
> chairs <http://internetgov-cs.org/procedures>.
>
> With immediate effect, the Civil Society Coordination Group (CSCG
> <http://internetgov-cs.org/>), which works to ensure a co-ordinated civil
> society response and conduit when it comes to making civil society
> appointments to outside bodies, has appointed a new chairpersons team:
> Analía Aspis and Richard Hill have both been elected unanimously, and they
> will serve as equal Co-chairs.
>
> This appointment follows Ian Peter's retirement from the role of Chair of
> CSCG, as his term of office has ended, and he did not volunteer for serving
> another term. CSCG is extremely grateful to Ian for his skillful leadership
> over the past years.
>
> Any questions do let us know!
>
> Best,
> Sheetal & Poncelet
> --
> *Sheetal Kumar*
> Programme Manager | GLOBAL PARTNERS DIGITAL
> Second Home, 68-80 Hanbury Street, London, E1 5JL
> T: +44 (0)20 3 818 3258 0337| M: +44 (0)7739569514  |
>


-- 
*WISDOM DONKOR (S/N Eng.)*
E-government and Open Government Data Platforms Specialist
National Information Technology Agency (NITA)/
Ghana Open Data Initiative Project.
ICANN Fellow / Member, UN IGF MAG Member, ISOC Member,
Freedom Online Coalition (FOC) Member, Diplo Foundation Member,
OGP Open Data WG Member, GODAN Memember, ITAG Member
Email: wisdom_dk at hotmail.com
wisdom.donkor at data.gov.gh
wisdom.dk at gmail.com
Skype: wisdom_dk
facebook: facebook at wisdom_dk
Website: www.nita.gov.gh / www.data.gov.gh
www.isoc.gh / www.itag.org.gh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20161007/810ea546/attachment.htm>