[governance] FW: [A2k] keeping an eye on IP enforcement/ISP liability in Europe: good news from Sweden

[Parminder]

> I would understand the significance of the above from an "Internet
> Governance" perspective as reflecting a shift from concerns with Internet
> Governance as developing the broad framework for the "governance" of a
> privately delivered widely valuable but discretionary service to the
> "governance" of a public good being delivered in the public interest with
> the various "governance" implications that would flow from this.

I propose that IGC sponsors a workshop at the IGF on this issue. Connects IG
to 'development' as little else does. I would say that this is the real
'substance' of a 'development agenda' in IG. 

And IGF keeps insisting that seeing IG in a development context is the main
agenda at the IGF.

Parminder 




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 1:11 AM
> To: 'Parminder'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] FW: [A2k] keeping an eye on IP enforcement/ISP
> liability in Europe: good news from Sweden
> 
> I should be clear here, the below was my interpretation (and extrapolation
> from) the account of the Swedish Ministers' comments...
> 
> Why I think this would be notable if my interpretation is correct (or
> could
> be "used" as correct) is that for example in Canada governments have been
> moving quite rapidly towards a de facto social requirement for Internet
> access (welfare application forms in some provinces are only available off
> the Internet!?!, there are now significant incentives towards online
> filing
> of income tax forms through a guarantee of quicker reviews and thus
> quicker
> access to refunds where appropriate and so on).
> 
> However, governments have not similarly acknowledged the public
> responsibility attendant on that development which is to ensure some form
> of
> broadly distributed universally accessible public Internet access. (Should
> taxpayers be charged a second time for accessing public information
> particularly when that second charge would (most generally) represent a
> tax
> on those least able to pay?)
> 
> I would understand the significance of the above from an "Internet
> Governance" perspective as reflecting a shift from concerns with Internet
> Governance as developing the broad framework for the "governance" of a
> privately delivered widely valuable but discretionary service to the
> "governance" of a public good being delivered in the public interest with
> the various "governance" implications that would flow from this.
> 
> Surely a significant role for CS in the area of Internet Governance
> (understood as the Governance of the Internet) is to find ways of
> affirming,
> supporting and reinforcing this latter perspective and working with
> governments and others to determine the policy/programming approaches that
> flow from this.
> 
> MG
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> Sent: March 15, 2008 10:01 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'Michael Gurstein'
> Subject: RE: [governance] FW: [A2k] keeping an eye on IP enforcement/ISP
> liability in Europe: good news from Sweden
> 
> 
> 
> > I believe what is being suggested here (the underlying article is
> > unfortunately only in Swedish) is that Internet access (in Sweden and
> > thus by implication in all Developed Countries) should be treated as a
> > a service fundamental to public well-being ("imperative welfare"),
> > presumably on the order of areas such as fresh water and clean air
> > rather than on the order of
> > a discretionary service such as for example cable television or a bank
> > account.
> >
> 
> Thanks Mike for pointing to this...
> 
> Something to reflect on why would this formulation first arise in a
> developed country when 'digital divide' is considered really an issue of
> developing countries. It is strange that when public connectivity
> infrastructure (Muni-wifi) is becoming such an important thing in the
> North,
> policy prescription for the South is still markets, markets and more
> markets
> for an 'IS for all'. This prescription is pushed through donor agencies,
> including many international NGOs, through control over purse strings, as
> well as a superior capacity to theorize, write out and push policy and
> practice frameworks for ICTD.
> 
> It is a bit ironic that such a 'welfarist' formulation comes first from a
> government, that too of the North (with lesser social equity issues)
> rather
> than civil society, which is normally considered a progressive force.
> 
> I am quite sure there will be little or no discussion on this issue here,
> even with this lead. Some may just not be bothered. Others will use the
> argument that it is not a core governance issue. I will like this to be
> debated here. How whether Internet is seen essentially as a market
> infrastructure, or it is seen as something 'fundamental to public well
> being' not impact the nature of its governance systems is really beyond
> me.
> 
> Meanwhile, mentions of public/ community infrastructure keep disappearing
> (even after it is put there with a lot of effort in the first place) from
> IGF's agenda. It happened in Athens, and Hyderabad's program details are
> already showing the same tendencies. And we the IGC - the CS front in IG
> area - are hardly concerned. No discussion, no talk about it. But the
> moment
> anyone tries to posit basic governance issue like managing CIRs as
> important
> issue for IGF, such strong sentiment wells up to tell us that governance
> issues are not the real thing, access is. It is more than a bit funny.
> (sorry, for the sarcasm, but I really feel very bad about it.)
> 
> And the problem is that any effort to discuss such substantive issues - of
> what we stand for, whom we present - immediately comes up against either
> allegations of 'trying to get exclusive', causing distraction, or plainly,
> what Meryem called as 'inertia games.
> 
> I think we cant really be arguing on who should we nominate for MAG, how
> many seats we should get etc without internally examining who we are, what
> and whom do we represent, why should we be seen as the major CS front in
> IG
> area... and such.
> 
> I would think, it is hypocritical to speak about increased representation
> on
> the MAG without at all examining these issues. We must be alive to a
> possible view that we may just be illegitimately occupying a CS vacuum in
> the IG space, and trying to further consolidate the advantage.
> 
> Parminder
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, March 15, 2008 11:04 PM
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > Subject: [governance] FW: [A2k] keeping an eye on IP enforcement/ISP
> > liability in Europe: good news from Sweden
> >
> > This does I think, have significant implications for "Internet
> > governance"...including changing the status in policy terms of exactly
> > what is being "governed"...
> >
> > I believe what is being suggested here (the underlying article is
> > unfortunately only in Swedish) is that Internet access (in Sweden and
> > thus by implication in all Developed Countries) should be treated as a
> > a service fundamental to public well-being ("imperative welfare"),
> > presumably on the order of areas such as fresh water and clean air
> > rather than on the order of
> > a discretionary service such as for example cable television or a bank
> > account.
> >
> > MG
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: a2k-admin at lists.essential.org
> > [mailto:a2k-admin at lists.essential.org]
> > On Behalf Of Vera Franz
> > Sent: March 14, 2008 7:59 AM
> > To: ipr&publicdomain; a2k discuss list
> > Subject: [A2k] keeping an eye on IP enforcement/ISP liability in Europe:
> > good news from Sweden
> >
> > "The proposal in the Renfors-review that ISPs should be given the
> > right and be forced to shut down subscribers whose Internet
> > subscription has repeatedly been used for infringing copyrights has
> > met with strong criticism. Many have noted that shutting down an
> > Internet subscription is a
> > wide-reaching measure that could have serious repercussions in a society
> > where access to the Internet is an imperative welfare-issue. The
> > government
> > has, because of this, decided not to pursue this proposal."
> >
> > ---Swedish Minister of Justice Beatrice Ask & Swedish Minister of
> > Culture Lena Adelsohn Liljeroth in today's Swedens Daily.
> > http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/artikel_972903.svd
> >
> > --
> > Vera Franz
> > Program Manager
> > Information Program
> > <www.soros.org/ip>
> > Open Society Foundation
> > 100, Cambridge Grove
> > London W6 0LE
> > phone +44 20 7031 0219
> > fax +44 20 7031 0247
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message might contain confidential information and is protected
> > by copyright. If you receive it in error, please notify us, delete it
> > and do not make use of or copy it.
> > _______________________________________________
> > A2k mailing list
> > A2k at lists.essential.org
> > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k
> >
> >
> > !DSPAM:2676,47dbc344227569846876981!
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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