[governance] Where are we with IGC workshops?

[Michael Leibrandt]

Le 11 avr. 08 à 16:58, Michael Leibrandt a écrit :

> Hi there,
>
> Reading the proposed ws titles again after sipping some smooth 
> fresh coconut juice at the endless coast of Bahia, I think they 
> sound somewhat too >academic< and - boring.

Academic?? Check twice that you're not drinking a batida de coco 
instead of a coco verde:) Both are good, anyway..

***Just coconut juice, honestly. Maybe Brasil is simply too hot for Germans. Seriously: There are many people who get scared and run away when a ws title sounds like a scientific article. Me, for example ;-).

> I guess we`re not doing this exercise just for us, but want to 
> attract co-sponsors and participants with different and often 
> limited IG backgrounds. Based on Meryems comment, my suggestions 
> would be as follows:
>
> 1- "Role and Mandate of IGF"
>
> We`re moving towards the third IGF, so please no more discussions 
> about the present IGF settings and/or TA interpretations. How about 
> >Future Development of the IGF<?

Tabula rasa? Hell no! The aim of this (hopefully now recurrent) 
workshop is accountability for the past and, I agree, discussing the 
future. This has to be reflected in the WS title.

***Is it really worth the time - and attractive to potential listeners - to use the ws for ex post analysis? People want to know why it makes sense to contribute to the IGF process towards India and beyond. At least many government guys do. Anyway, past and future could be combined in the title as you suggested. 

> 2- "Critical Internet Resources"
>
> Maybe we can openly say >Internationalization of Internet 
> Governance<?

Why not. A bit of a holdall, though, just like CIR.

***Agree. Maybe colleagues have a better wording.

> 3- "IG and global jurisdiction - political, legal, contractual,
> technical and private means/instruments"
>
> Is it really about >jurisdiction< at the global level, or more 
> about >decision making< processes in a wider sense?

For former messages on this, I understand it's actually about 
jurisdiction

***Maybe I have a problem with the phrase >global jurisdiction< because I don`t see a one world government defending a global legal framework yet (and don`t want to have that, to be clear). WIPO ADR decisions on gTLD, for example, are actually not >jurisdiction<. The growing problem is, to my knowledge, that national/regional jurisdiction more and more have de facto extraterritorial effects. 

> The main challenge seems to be that we have to combine a global 
> infrastructure with local and regional needs and expectations. How 
> about >Local Users in Global Internet Governance<? This includes, 
> among others, the consumer confronted with foreign custom duties as 
> well as the SME confonted with foreign intellectual property regimes.

I'm not sure this new title would reflect the initial idea, as 
there's no global governance yet, that's the point we would like to 
discuss, actually.

***Disagree. For example, ICANN is a global governance body that can effect local and regional users with its decisions. Or do we have a misunderstanding at this point?

> 4- "Coexistence of commercial and non-profit spaces on the Internet -
> implications for IG"
>
> In the Web 2.0 world you can often find both spaces in just one 
> entity. I would use a shortened version of Meryems proposal: 
> >Commons, public service and commercial values<.

Thinking twice about my own proposal, it seems weird to speak of 
'commercial values' here (or even elsewhere, but that's another 
story:)). What about "Coexistence of commons, public service and 
commercial spaces: IG issues"?

***Still have a problem with the word >space<. Would be helpful to know more about your understanding. The time of a clear distinction between so called stakeholder groups has long gone.   

An academic, boring, methodological remark: we should better start 
with WS description, then the title would impose itself:))

***Fully agree. Though sometimes the title discussion leads to the content question. Anyway, for the substantial discussion I might finally switch to the Batida de Coco...


Michael


_______________________________________________________________________
Jetzt neu! Schützen Sie Ihren PC mit McAfee und WEB.DE. 30 Tage
kostenlos testen. http://www.pc-sicherheit.web.de/startseite/?mc=022220

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance