[governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme

[William Drake]

Without having asked MAG people about the reasoning, I'm going to guess that
universalization is feared by some to open the door to consideration of such
options as universal access obligations and associated regulations being
imposed on major ISPs, VOIP providers, etc... ?  These questions are already
being considered by NRAs in North America, Europe, etc. in the context of
IP-enhanced services, NGN, etc.--presumably all the more reason we shouldn't
talk about them?

Bill

Quoting Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>:

> Reaching the next billion sounds very evangelical rather than principled and
> unlike the UN - but does give indication of the voices heard loudest.
>
> That universalisation is at all contentious is a statement in itself - is
> universal rights contentious? Universal education?
>
> Can anyone give background as to why it is contentious?
>
>
>
> Ian Peter
> Ian Peter and Associates Pty Ltd
> PO Box 10670 Adelaide St  Brisbane 4000
> Australia
> Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
> www.ianpeter.com
> www.internetmark2.org
> www.nethistory.info
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Meryem Marzouki [mailto:marzouki at ras.eu.org]
> > Sent: 10 June 2008 18:28
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > Subject: Re: [governance] new paper on the Hyderaband [sic] programme
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I second Vittorio's comment. These choices are very surprising (or
> > are they not surprising at all?!). A good summary of this process
> > seems to be found in the document itself. To simply quote one
> > example: "The heading previously under consideration –
> > ʻUniversalization of the Internetʼ – was not retained, as it was
> > deemed controversial. “Reaching the next billion” was felt to be
> > more neutral and acceptable by all." 'Universalization' felt
> > controversial for a UN meeting: go figure!
> > It's quite interesting that a discursive space such as the IGF, where
> > absolutely no decision is made (and even a simple "message" cannot be
> > elaborated) is so worried about any discussion taking place.
> > Yes, the objective of this so-called "substantive" program seems to
> > ensure broader and safer market opportunities for business. Very
> > innovative indeed.
> >
> > So we had a first list of themes, and we were encouraged to propose
> > workshops according to this list:
> > - Universalization of the Internet - How to reach the next billion
> > (Expanding the Internet),
> > - Low cost sustainable access,
> > - Multilingualization,
> > - Implications for development policy,
> > - Managing the Internet (Using the Internet),
> > - Critical Internet resources,
> > - Arrangements for Internet governance,
> > - Global cooperation for Internet security and stability,
> > - Taking stock and the way forward,
> > - Emerging issues
> > (http://www.intgovforum.org/workshop_info.htm)
> >
> > Then the list has been modified at the time the workshop were
> > submitted, to the extent that proposers were confused about how they
> > were supposed to make their proposals, and workshops are currently
> > classified according to this list:
> > - access,
> > - diversity,
> > - openness,
> > - security,
> > - critical internet resources,
> > - development,
> > - capacity building,
> > - others
> > (http://www.intgovforum.org/workshops_08/wrkshplist.php)
> >
> > And the list has been modified again, with the current resulting themes:
> > - Reaching the Next Billion,
> > - Promoting Cyber-Security and Trust,
> > - Managing Critical Internet Resources,
> > - Taking Stock and the Way Forward,
> > - Emerging Issues
> > (http://www.intgovforum.org/hyderabad_prog/ProgrammePaper.
> > 05.06.2008.pdf)
> >
> > The question is then: what will happen with the proposed workshops,
> > including IGC workshops?
> >
> > Best,
> > Meryem
> >
> > Le 10 juin 08 à 08:10, Vittorio Bertola a écrit :
> >
> > > Adam Peake ha scritto:
> > >> Hi,
> > >> Anyone want to give a bit of thought the Hyderabad programme?
> > >> Perfect, no problems...
> > >
> > > Yes I have a comment: I am quite surprised by the choice of main
> > > themes, since apparently any reference to rights, duties and
> > > freedoms has disappeared... there is an agenda item on access, one
> > > on security and one on critical Internet resources, but nothing on
> > > "openness" and nothing on "diversity". That's not good news at all
> > > - correct me if I'm wrong, but most themes civil society is
> > > interested in, as well as many (perhaps most) coalitions, are
> > > working in the "openness" family of issues, and now these themes
> > > are off the agenda. Or did I misunderstand the meaning of the paper?
> > > If the only themes that the IGF will be promoting in the future are
> > > how to export technology into developing countries and how to
> > > implement effective law enforcement over the Internet, the interest
> > > in attending for civil society could be quite low.
> > > --
> > > vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
> > > -------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG.
> > Version: 8.0.100 / Virus Database: 270.2.0/1493 - Release Date: 6/9/2008
> > 5:25 PM
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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