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

[Ken Lohento]

Dear Meryem, Ian, colleagues

1) During the MAG meeting, (I participated remotely), I was one of the 
people who indicated that we should not use “universalization of the 
internet” because it might be controversial. As you know, the word 
universal itself is sometimes controversial, because it refers to 
things, patterns, cultural schemes, that we may say there are common to 
all human beings. And in a lot of cases, dominant cultural schemes, 
widely disseminated, may be qualified as universal. Many would argue 
that we do say “universal access” in health, in political economy, but 
“universalization of the internet”(contents also?) is a new invented 
term, of which content has not been discussed and agreed upon. So I 
prefer that we have something less controversial (in fact other people 
had the same argument against that phrase during the open consultations 
according to what I heard, and also some MAG people shared that 
opinion). I also think some feared regulations that may be imposed on 
ISP, etc, because of universal access obligations, as William indicated. 
“Reaching the next billion of users” was then proposed to be only kept. 
I do think that this is more neutral and frankly, it indicates more 
directly what we want, which is access for all. However, other 
colleagues said it was better to withdraw “of users”, giving various 
reasons. I agree “reaching the next billion” may seem evangelical, but 
personally I prefer it (or rather I prefer “reaching the next billion of 
users”) to “universalization of the internet”.

 2) Regarding the draft programme proposed, the full presentation of 
them is as follows (as in the draft program  sent  by Adam)

- Reaching the next billion

** Access

** Multilingualism. 

- Promoting cyber-security and trust

** Are we losing the battle against cyber-crime?

** Fostering security, privacy and openness

- Managing critical Internet resources

** Transition from IPv4 to IPv6.

** Arrangements for Internet governance – global and national/regional.

- Taking Stock and the Way Forward

- Emerging issues.

 So first of all, I would to say that openness, diversity and 
multilingualism are of course included in the themes to be discussed. 
This new presentation was also proposed by the MAG because a lot of 
people suggested (open consultations, written contributions, etc.), that 
we have headings differents from the four or five classic used in Athens 
and Rio (Access, Diversity, Security and Openness + CIR).

 Above all, this is also a result of a multistakeholder discussion (I’m 
not sure this statement will be welcome but…:-) - And I believe was is 
essential is  included, even though personally I’m not totally satisfied.

 That presentation will have no impact according to my understanding for 
workshop selection. (the main  suggestion  made  by the MAG here is that 
some workshop  are merged, because notably of  logistical slots 
available and common themes.

Finally, it’s still a rolling document and if we want to argue for some 
changes, there’s still room for that.

Rgds

Ken L

____________________________________________________________
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