[governance] IGF workshops
Jeanette Hofmann
jeanette at wzb.eu
Tue Apr 29 11:51:48 EDT 2008
A yes to all 4 workshop proposals from me as well.
I hope though that the one on rights will be revised after the submission.
jeanette
shaila mistry wrote:
> "Yes" to all four workshops
> Shaila Rao Mistry
>
> */Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>/* wrote:
>
>
> Hi all
>
> Please find enclosed the full text of four workshop proposals, that IGC
> proposes to sponsor at the IGF, Hyderabad.
>
> 1. The Transboundary Internet: Jurisdiction, Control and Sovereignty
>
> 2. The Future of ICANN: After the JPA, What?
>
> 3. A Rights Agenda for Internet Governance
>
> 4. The role and mandate of the IGF
>
>
> These are being put for a 48 hour consensus process. If a consensus or a
> rough consensus is made out, these proposals will be submitted to
> the IGF
> secretariat on the 30th, around 5 PM GMT.
>
> Please indicate a clear 'yes' or 'no' for forwarding these proposals, as
> they stand...
>
> While additional comments justifying a yes or no vote may be made, they
> should follow a clear unqualified 'yes' or 'no'.
>
> In fact such additional comments are welcome especially in case of a
> 'no'
> vote, because it helps calling a possible rough consensus, taking into
> consideration the nature and the extent of dissent.
>
> Thanks
>
> Parminder
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> From: "Bret Fausett" <bfausett at internet.law.pro>
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] Workshop Proposal: Transboundary Internet
> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:57:53 +0530
>
> 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
> From: "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu>
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] Internationalization Workshop
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 01:42:02 +0530
>
>
> Here is the proposal as it now stands. Note that after two requests we
> are still waiting for volunteers/interested parties from this list.
> 1. Name of proposed workshop
> The Future of ICANN: After the JPA, What?
>
> 2. Provide a concise description of the proposed workshop theme
> including its importance and relevance to the IGF.
> ICANN, which coordinates and sets policy for the global domain name
> system (DNS) and IP addressing, is linked to the US Government
> through a
> Joint Project Agreement (JPA) that expires in September 2009. The JPA
> and its renewal process provides what, during WSIS, became known as
> "political oversight" over ICANN. The US government says that it is
> committed to "completing the transition" to private sector coordination
> of the Domain Name System, which implies an expiration of the JPA.
> During the recent mid-term review, ICANN made it clear that it also
> strongly supports an end to the JPA. ICANN's call was supported by some
> stakeholders, but others expressed concerns about ensuring its
> accountability without some kind of governmental oversight.
> This panel is designed to provide a careful and balanced exploration of
> whether ICANN is ready to be free of US government oversight, and if so
> what kind of external oversight - if any - should replace it. Panelists
> will be encouraged to provide specific models for ICANN's status and
> various oversight models and offer practical suggestions on how to make
> changes in the current situation. Advocates of retaining the status quo
> will also be represented.
>
> 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
> you approached them about their willingness to participate in proposed
> workshop.
>
> ICANN: Peter Dengate Thrush
> IGP: Milton Mueller
> Dr. Vladimir V. Sokolov, Moscow State University, Deputy Director,
> International Institute for
> Government of Canada
> Michael Palage, Attorney and former ICANN Board member
> Nashwa Abdel Baki, Egyptian Universities Network (EUN)
> <civil society representative selected by IGC>
> Internet Society - either Stefano Trumpy or Lynn St. Amour
> Milton Mueller
> Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> XS4All Professor, Delft University of Technology
> ------------------------------
> Internet Governance Project:
> http://internetgovernance.org
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> From: "karen banks" <karenb at gn.apc.org>
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] IGC workshop: A rights agenda for Internet
> Governance
> Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 15:41:15 +0530
>
> Dear all
>
> A working group comprised of the following folk have worked hard to
> draft a proposal on:
>
> A rights agenda for internet goernance
>
> The working group included : Michael Gurstein, Parminder Jeet
> Singh, Lisa Horner, Konstantinos Komaitis, Vittorio Bertola, Robin
> Gross, Robert Guerra, rafik dammak, linda misek-falkoff and myself.
> I believe posts were also shared from time to time with the bill or
> rights coalition. (colleagues - please clarify any omissions i may
> have made in that list..)
>
> It was a very interesting drafting process, and we fully realise
> that this is a complex and challenging topic to bring to the IGF
> Table - but we are convinced that it is not only relevant to the IGF
> Mandate, but central to the mandate and the long term impact of the
> IGF process.
>
> Please review the attached draft - we look forward to your comments
> in relation to
>
> - the substantive sections (q2 and q6)
> - ideas for panellists and main actors in the field (q3)
> - ideas for 2 or 3 additional co-sponsors (q4)
> - your thoughts on which theme(s) the proposal best fits with - i
> would say it's an 'missing' crosscut ;)
>
> we'll take a round of comments til end monday (april 28th) and take
> it from there..
>
> thanks everyone
>
> karen (for michael, parminder and the working group)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> From: "Jeremy Malcolm" <Jeremy at Malcolm.id.au>
> To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> Subject: [governance] Workshop proposal: The Role and Mandate of the IGF
> Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 16:48:37 +0530
>
> A small working group comprising Lee McKnight, Karen Banks, Baudouin
> Schombe and myself was recently convened by Parminder to work on a
> proposal for a workshop for Hyderabad on "The Role and Mandate of the
> IGF".
> Whilst not everyone in the working group has had the time to consider
> this text (which myself, Baudouin and Parminder contributed to), it is
> presented now due to pressure of time, since the approval of the
> caucus is required before 30 April.
> Please send comments on the draft proposal to the list as soon as
> possible. Thank you!
> --- begins ---
> Title of the Workshop: 'The role and mandate of the IGF'
> Civil Society Internet Caucus held a workshop on the same theme, 'The
> role and mandate of the IGF', at IGF, Rio. A report of this first
> workshop is found athttp://intgovforum.org/Rio_event_report.php?
> mem=30. It was driven by an identification of a need for regular self-
> appraisal of the IGF vis-à-vis its mandated role. Such a ‘periodic
> review’ is also required by the Tunis Agenda (paragraph 73 b).
> Consequently, the caucus proposes to hold a workshop with the same
> title during IGF, Hyderabad.
> The role and mandate of the Internet Governance Forum were set out in
> general terms at the World Summit on the Information Society,
> particularly in paragraph 72 of the Tunis Agenda. However since the
> conclusion of the World Summit, various interpretations of this
> general statement of the IGF's role and mandate have been put forward
> and continue to be debated amongst its stakeholders. Some believe
> that there are elements of the IGF's mandate that have been overlooked
> or minimised in its operation to date. Others maintain, to the
> contrary, that the IGF must contain the overreaching ambitions of
> those who would transform it from a non-binding forum for discussion
> into something more.
> Since IGF, Hyderabad, represents the midpoint in the initial 5 year
> term of the IGF after which the whole IGF process is sought to be
> reviewed. It will be pertinent at this midpoint to
> (1) review how the IGF has fared till now vis-à-vis its TA
> mandate, and whether any structure and/or substance corrections are
> needed for the remaining part of its initial 5 year mandate
> (2) what are the emerging views on post-2010 arrangements for
> the IGF, if one is at all needed.
> There has been unmistakable improvements in the IGF format and
> substance since its first meeting whether it has been to include
> topics earlier considered too controversial (CIRs for Rio) or more
> focused discussions on specific issues (as per tentative program for
> Hyderabad). The directions of these changes vis-à-vis fulfillment of
> the mandate of the IGF may also be an important issue of discussion.
> Since paragraph 73 also speaks about a ‘decentralized structure’ it
> will also be worth exploring how can the IGF be decentralized beyond
> the present structure of a single annual event, perhaps by exploring
> IGF like structures at the regional and national levels (which will
> inter aliafulfill part of the requirements of paragraph 80) and
> working group working on important issues contributing to the
> proceedings of the annual event.
> --
> Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
> Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
> host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
>
> **be as a well......sure and limitless....
> but as time befits.....assume other forms .... ***
> **
> **
> *
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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
More information about the Governance
mailing list