[governance] Caucus process comment

[William Drake]

Hi,

I strongly agree with Ralf.  I cannot imagine how we would pull off
something this grandiose given the time and available bandwidth, and it
would indeed require a lot of close cooperation with the human rights
community or you'd be opening a real Pandora's Box.  Reaching agreement on
contested issues within one caucus is not hard enough, we should try two?
Nor is it obvious that this is would be particularly strategic move, given
that the debate is focused on entirely different and pressing issues. 
Even if we could miraculously come up with a "bill of rights" between now
and mid-September, how would we input that into the process in any
meaningful way when all other stakeholders are busy preparing positions
and burning up the phone lines on other items, which will inter alia eat
up the entire PrepCom and probably spill over into a pre-Summit crisis
negotiation in Tunis?  And basing it on Barlow's weed-soaked
fantasies...dear governments, we declare our virtual selves immune to your
sovereignty...I'm sure they'd be very impressed.  Self-immolation is
always very impressive.

I think Adam spelled out a good approach, and agree that we should try to
say something useful about what is actually on the agenda and to be
decided.

Best,

Bill



>> Vittorio wrote:
>>> a sort of "bill of rights" of Internet users, ie the Internet version
>>> of the UDHR,
>
> I strongly suggest to not do anything in this direction without close
> coordination with the Human Rights Caucus. I know that Rikke Frank
> Joergensen is currently finishing an edited volume (in Bill's MIT series)
> on Human Rights in the Information Society. There is a lot of stuff out
> there already.
> Another thing is the debate around communication rights that might start
> again then. Not sure if this would mess things up or bring in some
> perspectives...
>
> Wolfgang replies:
>> This could be good idea and initiative. We have Barlows Declaration of
>> Cyberindependence, which needs some streamlining after eight years.
>
> The Barlow declaration is a historical document from the heights of cyber
> self-regulation. I don't think it can simply be updated under current
> circumstances.
>
> Pragmatically speaking, I would recommend to start from the documents this
> caucus has already produced and polish those so everyone more or less
> agrees.
>
> Everything further is a bit too much work for now and as I said needs more
> coordination with other caucuses. We could / should keep that project in
> mind for PrepCom3 and the summit, as we will probably need an independent
> CS document for the summit again.
>
> Ralf
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>


*******************************************************
William J. Drake  wdrake at ictsd.ch
President, Computer Professionals for
   Social Responsibility www.cpsr.org
Senior Associate, International Centre for Trade
   and Sustainable Development www.ictsd.org
   Geneva, Switzerland
http://mitpress.mit.edu/IRGP-series
http://www.cpsr.org/board/drake
Morality is the best of all devices for leading
mankind by the nose.---Nietzsche
*******************************************************



_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance