[governance] Workshop Proposal: Transboundary Internet

Fri Apr 25 05:17:30 EDT 2008

Hi, I like and support this proposal. The only aspect I find a bit too 
vague yet concerns the expected outcome. A real added value of exploring 
the implications of the "various approaches to resolving these issues" 
would be the prospect of some recommendations on principles or strategies.
Another point: I would try to go for less people on the panel. The more 
people on the panel, the less time for the audience to raise questions 
and interact with the panel. Its not realistic to restrict panelists to 
presentations of a few minutes only.
jeanette

Bret Fausett wrote:
> All, below is a draft workshop proposal that Meryem Marzouki, William 
> Drake, Ian Peter, Parminder Singh and I have been working on. We plan to 
> submit it by the deadline, but would like your input and suggestions, on 
> all aspects.
> 
>      -- Bret
> 
> - - - - - D R A F T - - - - -
> 
> 1.    Name of proposed workshop
> The Transboundary Internet: Jurisdiction, Control and Sovereignty
> 
> 2.    Provide a concise description of the proposed workshop theme 
> including its importance and relevance to the IGF.
> 
> The Internet crosses the boundaries of all nations and raises some 
> unique transboundary jurisdictional problems. The recent case of a 
> British citizen living in Spain, with Internet servers in the Bahamas, 
> selling holidays to Cuba, and having his domain name impounded by a 
> registrar located in the USA because it appeared to break the US embargo 
> against Cuba is one recent case in point. Another landmark case was the 
> French-US Yahoo! case in 1999 dealing with sale of nazi memorabilia, but 
> but apart from these high profile content cases there are many examples 
> in other areas such as privacy, consumer issues, cybercrime, and 
> intellectual property.
> 
> This workshop will discuss the many implications of competing national 
> jurisdictions being projected into a globalized space where multiple 
> normative sources apply, such as political, legal, technical, 
> contractual, and behavioral regulations. Through practical case studies, 
> this workshop will look at the implications of various approaches to 
> resolving these issues and the implications for Internet governance, 
> international law, national sovereignty, democracy, and human rights and 
> fundamental freedoms.
> The workshop also explores the implications for Internet governance 
> where no structures are in place to deal with emerging issues, and how 
> default unilateral action in the absence of structural alternatives can 
> lead to de facto Internet governance.
> 
> 3.    Provide the names and affiliations of the panellists you are 
> planning to invite. Describe the main actors in the field and whether 
> you have approached them about their willingness to participate in 
> proposed workshop.
> 
> NB. Workshop duration is 90mn, which means that we should have no more 
> than 6-7 panelists plus chair. This is a tentative list of speakers.
> 
> •    Maud de Boer-Buquicchio, Deputy Secretary General, The Council of 
> Europe
> •    Manon Ress /James Love, Knowledge Ecology International/CPTech, USA
> •    Meryem Marzouki, President, European Digital Rights, Europe
> •    Bret A. Fausett, Internet law Attorney, Cathcart, Collins & 
> Kneafsey, LLP USA
> •    Ian Peter, Internet Analyst, Ian Peter and Associates, Australia
> •    William Drake, Graduate Institute of International and Development 
> Studies, Switzerland
> 
> Yet to be approached: other identified experts with various perspectives 
> on specific case studies.
> 
> Themes to be discussed by speakers:
> •    Liability and the principle of the country of origin (off-line and 
> on-line content): Convention on Transfrontier television, Rome II, 
> Convention on TV without Frontiers,
> •    Consumer protection, contracts, etc.: Hague Convention, E-commerce 
> directive
> •    Cybercrime: The CoE Convention, its protocols and implementation 
> activities
> •    Technical and contractual means: ISP charters and hotlines, 
> blocking (cf. Pakistan case)
> •    Harmonization of national laws through intergovernmental agreements
> 
> 4.    Provide the name of the organizer(s) of the workshop and their 
> affiliation to various stakeholder groups. Describe how you will take 
> steps to adhere to the multi-stakeholder principle, geographical 
> diversity and gender balance.
> 
> -    The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (Civil society)
> -    The Council of Europe – TBC (Intergovernmental organization)
> -    European Digital Rights (Civil society)
> -    Knowledge Ecology International (KEI/CPTech) – TBC (Civil society)
> -    Ian Peter and Associates – TBC (Private sector)
> 
> Yet to be approached: Some governments (e.g. France, USA, Netherlands, 
> ...); other intergovernmental organizations (e.g. OSCE, OCDE,...), other 
> private sector constituencies (e.g. ISP associations, newspaper 
> associations, registrars, search engine/social networking companies, 
> ...); other civil society constituencies.
> 
> 5.    Does the proposed workshop provide different perspectives on the 
> issues under discussion?
> 
> Yes. Expertise is being sought from various areas to provide a 
> comprehensive coverage of issues and perspectives involved (to be 
> updated later).
> 
> 6.    Please explain how the workshop will address issues relating to 
> Internet governance and describe how the workshop conforms with the 
> Tunis Agenda in terms of substance and the mandate of the IGF.
> The first and foremost need for global Internet governance arrangements 
> comes from the global, cross-boundaries nature of the Internet. Issues 
> with global Internet governance are not only related to critical 
> Internet resources management, but also to the circulation of content 
> and data and to the protection of the general communications 
> infrastructure. Jurisdictions, control and sovereignty issues are thus 
> at the heart of global Internet governance discussions. Given the 
> difficulty to harmonize national legislations, and given the issue of 
> the competence of jurisdictions, alternative methods to State 
> regulations are more and more considered, promoted and implemented. It 
> is the very aim of this workshop to explore and discuss these alternatives.
> TA: Para 72(b)(c)(g)(i)(k)
> 
> 7.    List similar events you and/or any other IGF workshops you have 
> organized in the past.
> 
> The Civil,Society Internet Governance Caucus and other sponsors have 
> organized workshops at previous IGF meetings (to be updated later)
> 
> 8.    Were you part of organizing a workshop last year? Which one? Did 
> you submit a workshop report?
> 
> Yes (to be updated with list of previous workshops)
> 
> 9.    Under which of the five IGF themes does the proposal fall under ?
> 
> •    Managing the Internet (Using the Internet)
> •    Arrangements for Internet governance
> 
> - - - - - D R A F T - - - - -
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
____________________________________________________________
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