[governance] RE: Statement to the February OC: the way forward

[Ian Peter]

Just a couple of suggested additions below. We do need to move to a
consensus call on this within a day or two.
> 
> 
> The Internet Governance Caucus supports “Rights and principles” as a major
> theme for IGF-4 in Egypt. This should lead to discourse at the IGF
> meetings
> leading towards the definition and clarification of rights in relation to
> the Internet, and how they relate to pre-existing definitions of human
> rights. It also includes a space for discussions about the
> responsibilities
> of all parties.

I agree. We seem to have general agreement to move from our previous
statements of rights as a theme to rights and principles


> 
> The concept of “rights” continues to stress the importance of openness and
> universal access. This framework will continue to emphasize the
> significant
> themes of access to knowledge and development,  while adding the important
> issues of basic user rights and control to access, content and
> applications
> of their choice, in keeping with current international debates.

Although I agree with this phrasing, I wonder what people think about us not
mentioning net neutrality at all or whether an addition such as "this
includes elements of the network neutrality debate" would be useful
> 
> The inclusion of “principles” allows for wide discussion of the
> responsibilities that the different stakeholders have to each other.
> Without invoking legislation or prohibitions, it allows for open
> examination
> of the principles that should govern the Internet, particularly in its
> commercial facets.
> 
> Within the mandate of the IGF and in support of strengthening this
> multistakeholder  process, we ask that the IGF Secretariat continue and
> expand the use of Remote Participation as a tool for attendance at the IGF
> 2009 in Egypt as a proven method to include new voices. To that end, we
> recommend that the Secretariat recognize the Remote Participation Working
> Group as a collaborating organization for the RP at the IGF 2009,
> especially
> in the area of Hub participation, and facilitate the use of the RP
> resources
> from the first planning stages for this 4th meeting.
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Ginger Paque [mailto:ginger at paque.net]
> Enviado el: Miércoles, 21 de Enero de 2009 03:41 p.m.
> Para: 'governance at lists.cpsr.org'
> Asunto: Statement OC February OC: the way forward
> 
> In parallel to the discussion on the IGC statement to the OC about the IGF
> process review as started by Ian, we must start a draft of our statement
> on
> the way forward, proposing the themes of rights, net neutrality within
> openness and universal access and possibly remote participation, as have
> been in discussion on the list.
> 
> I suggest we start our discussion with this short draft (the previous IGC
> statement “Rights and the Internet as the over-arching theme for IGF-4 in
> Egypt”  is copied below for your reference):
> 
> 
> The Internet Governance Caucus supports “Rights and principles” as a major
> theme for IGF-4 in Egypt. This should lead to discourse at the IGF
> meetings
> leading towards the definition and clarification of rights in relation to
> the Internet, and how they relate to pre-existing definitions of human
> rights. It also includes a space for discussions about the
> responsibilities
> of all parties.
> 
> The concept of “rights” continues to stress the importance of openness and
> universal access. This framework will continue to emphasize the
> significant
> themes of access to knowledge and development,  while adding the important
> issues of basic user rights and control to access, content and
> applications
> of their choice, in keeping with current international debates.
> 
> The inclusion of “principles” allows for wide discussion of the
> responsibilities that the different stakeholders have to each other.
>  Without invoking legislation or prohibitions, it allows for open
> examination of the principles that should govern the Internet,
> particularly
> in its commercial facets.
> 
> Within the mandate of the IGF and in support of strengthening this
> multistakeholder  process, we ask that the IGF Secretariat continue and
> expand the use of Remote Participation as a tool for attendance at the IGF
> 2009 in Egypt as a proven method to include new voices. To that end, we
> recommend that the Secretariat recognize the Remote Participation Working
> Group as a collaborating organization for the RP at the IGF 2009,
> especially
> in the area of Hub participation, and facilitate the use of the RP
> resources
> from the first planning stages for this 4th meeting.
> 
> 
> I look forward to your ideas on this.
> Regards,
> Ginger
> 
> IGC previous statement:
> Rights and the Internet as the over-arching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt
> 
> The Internet Governance Caucus strongly recommends that 'Rights and the
> Internet' be made the overarching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt, and that the
> IGF-4's program be framed by the desire for developing a rights-based
> discourse in the area of Internet Governance. The Caucus has already
> expressed support for the letter on this subject which was sent to the MAG
> by the Dynamic Coalition on an Internet Bill of Rights.
> 
> The IGC offers the IGF assistance in helping to shape such a discourse at
> the IGF meetings, and specifically to help make 'Rights and the Internet'
> an
> overarching theme for IGF-4 in Egypt.
> 
> A complex new emerging ecology of rights and the internet
> 
>  One important purpose of a discourse on rights should be to clarify and
> reach greater consensus on how rights with respect to the Internet are
> defined, how they relate to pre-existing definitions of human rights, and
> which ones need to be internationally recognized and strengthened. Within
> this context, we acknowledge that, even within the civil society caucus,
> differences of opinion exist as to the nature of various rights and
> conceptual rights and the degree to which they should be emphasized in
> internet governance discussions.
> 
> While the internet opens unprecedented economic, social and political
> opportunities in many areas, many fear that it may at the same time be
> further widening economic, social and political divides. It is for this
> reason that development has been a central theme for the IGF meetings to
> date. In this new, more global and digital context it might be useful to
> explore what the term "right to development" means.
> 
> With respect to privacy rights, corporations and governments are
> increasingly able to extend digital tentacles into people's homes and
> personal devices, in manners invisible to consumers and citizens.
> Consumers
> of digital products thus face new challenges including the right
> <http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=fa
> ls
> e&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfoot
> no
> te3sym>  to know and completely 'own' the products and services they pay
> for. Technological measures to monitor and control user behavior on the
> internet are becoming increasingly sophisticated, and often outrun public
> policies and traditional concepts of what rights users have.
> 
> While property rights are of considerable importance, their applicability
> and mutations in the digital environment have led to widespread political
> contention over the proper scope of copyrights, trademarks and patents. In
> fact, intellectual property is emerging as a primary area of socio-
> economic
> conflict in the information society.  The IGF can explore issues
> surrounding
> the public interest principles which underpin intellectual property claims
> alongside the concept of a right to access knowledge in the digital space
> It
> can also explore how individuals' property right to own, build, test, and
> use consumer electronics, computers and other forms of equipment can be
> reconciled with the regulation of technical circumvention to protect
> copyrights.
> 
> It may also be useful to explore if and how other concepts may be
> meaningful
> in relation to the Internet - for instance, a 'right to access the
> Internet
> unconditional of the use being made of it (similar to electricity and
> telephone). Similarly, a right of cultural _expression_, and a right to
> have
> an Internet in ones own language, could inform the important IGF thematic
> area of cultural diversity.
> 
> Other important internet policy areas, like network neutrality, are being
> framed in terms of rights, such as a right to access and share
> information,
> or as an extension of freedom of _expression_ itself. The right of the
> public
> to access government-produced information presents itself in a wholly new
> manner in a digital environment, where information is often publicly
> sharable at little or no extra cost. Positive acts of withholding digital
> public information from citizens in fact can be looked upon as a form of
> censorship. All of these rights-based conceptions may be included in the
> IGF
> openness theme area along with open standards Other rights such as the
> right
> of association and the right to political participation may have important
> new implications in the internet age,
> 
> We recognize that while it is relatively easy to articulate and claim
> "rights" it is much more difficult to agree on, implement and enforce
> them.
> We also recognize that rights claims can sometimes conflict or compete
> with
> each other. There can also be uncertainty about the proper application of
> a
> rights claim to a factual situation. The change in the technical methods
> of
> communication often undermines pre-existing understandings of how to apply
> legal categories.
> 
> These complexities, however, only strengthen the case for using the IGF to
> explicitly discuss and debate these problems. There is no other global
> forum
> where such issues can be raised and explored in a non-binding context.
> 
> Internet governance has up to this time largely been founded in technical
> principles and, increasingly, on the internet's functionality as a giant
> global marketplace. With the internet becoming  increasingly central to
> many
> social and political institutions, an alternative foundation and
> conceptual
> framework for IG can be explored. It is the view of the IG Caucus that a
> rights-based framework will be appropriate for this purpose.
> 
> A rights-based IG shouldn't be seen as threatening, but rather rights
> provide a set of international standards and guiding principles that can
> help to inform complex policy decisions. It is pertinent to recollect that
> WSIS called for a people-centric information society, and a rights
> framework
> helps develop people-centric IG agenda and polices.
> 
> It is the Caucus' view that the IGF is the forum best suited to take up
> this
> task. This process should start at the IGF Hyderabad, where workshops on
> rights issues are being planned.  These issues will also hopefully figure
> prominently in the main sessions. The IGC fully expects that these
> discussions will help the IGF work towards developing 'Rights and the
> Internet' as the over-arching theme of the IGF-4 in Egypt.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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