[governance] IGF workshops-Rights To/On the Internet

karen banks karenb at gn.apc.org
Wed Apr 30 04:43:10 EDT 2008


hi meryem and all

thanks michael for taking the proposal through the caucus concensus process..

as michael noted, i was in a two day meeting all 
day/night - which was pretty relevant to what 
we're talking about here..  the freedom of 
expression initiative - which is developing a 
principle/value framework rooted in human 
rights  (primarily article19, but others) - lisa 
horner, who works with global partners, the 
organisation leading the process, was involved in the workshop discussions

http://www.freedomofexpression.org.uk/

we missed your input and experience meryem, so 
hope you will have time to comment once we get past today's deadlines..

karen

At 17:49 29/04/2008, Meryem Marzouki wrote:
>Michael,
>
>this is to answer your mail below and the message you sent earlier on
>this issue.
>I've made clear that I won't oppose that IGC propose this workshop,
>and moreover I've made clear that this is because I haven't been able
>to take to the discussions in due time.
>
>So you can count my comments as a "yes", or as an abstention, but
>certainly not as a "no".
>
>I simply made these comments not to reopen any discussion *now*, but
>in view of possible further refinements of the proposal, after its
>submission.
>As a matter of fact, I note from your new subject line that you seem
>to also think there is a difference between "rights to" and "rights
>on" the Internet. What I was saying is that the 
>current formulation/ framing was mixing both, 
>and, in my opinion, this is inappropriate
>and counterproductive.
>
>I'll be happy to join dicussions, after submission deadline, on
>refining this proposal.
>
>Best,
>Meryem
>
>Le 29 avr. 08 à 18:39, Michael Gurstein a écrit :
>
>>
>>Karen, my co-convenor on the "Rights" Workshop is travelling I
>>think, at the
>>moment...
>>
>>In my earlier note in this thread I didn't mean to imply that the
>>formulation of the "Rights" Workshop was not a work in progress where
>>additional inputs would not be welcomed but rather that it was a
>>bit late to
>>re-open the discussion prior to the April 30 deadline.
>>
>>So far, contributors to the consensus on the current formulation of
>>the
>>Workshop (apart from Karen/APC, Parminder and myself) have included
>>Max
>>Senges,  Konstantinos Komaitis, Robert Guerra, Max Senges, Robin
>>Gross, Lisa
>>Horner, vittorio Bertola and linda misek-falkoff. (apologies if
>>I've missed
>>anyone).
>>
>>Certainly more contributors are welcomed and we can either continue
>>with a
>>thread on the full list or, as we did earlier develop an inclusive
>>side
>>discussion.
>>
>>MG
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jeanette Hofmann [mailto:jeanette at wzb.eu]
>>Sent: April 29, 2008 8:52 AM
>>To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
>>Cc: Parminder
>>Subject: Re: [governance] IGF workshops
>>
>>
>>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
>>
>>____________________________________________________________
>>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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080430/7364cdc4/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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