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

[Parminder]

>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 [and relevant aspects of the often confusing network neutrality discussions]

 


Ian

Alternatively we can say "..... in keeping with current international 
debates regarding an 'open Internet' [and relevant aspects of the often 
confusing network neutrality discussions].

As Lee mentioned no one seems to have objection to use of the term 'open 
Internet'. This term makes the issues under consideration more specific 
than just speaking about 'openness' theme, which has been around in the 
IGF for a few years and is interpreted rather flexibly. My concern is 
that when globally some specific issues in the area of 'open Internet' 
are hot, and some key decisions likely to be taken, w emake sure that 
the IGF does devotes some central space in its agenda to this issue. 
parminder


 


Ian Peter wrote:
>
> Not too late Parminder and thanks. I'm personally happy with the first 
> two changes you suggest
>
>  
>
> The particular issue we must resolve is whether to specifically 
> mention net neutrality or not -- we have differing opinions here. But 
> we all seem to agree it is a term which means different things to 
> different people. I think we also mostly agree that the debate is 
> often confusing and distorted away from what we are trying to achieve.
>
>  
>
> I'm personally not prepared to concede important rights and principles 
> discussions to the sort of distorted traffic management and carrier 
> profitability issues network neutrality evokes. To me any mention of 
> the term has to be somewhat qualified.
>
>  
>
> Perhaps we can compromise with something like the relevant paragraph 
> below, with some suggested additional text in square brackets
>
>  
>
> 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 [and relevant aspects of the often confusing network neutrality discussions]
>
>  
>
> Comments please? We do need to get to a consensus call within a day or so.
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Ian Peter
>
> PO Box 429
>
> Bangalow NSW 2479
>
> Australia
>
> Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
>
> www.ianpeter.com
>
>  
>
>  
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> *Sent:* 15 February 2009 15:55
> *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ginger Paque
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] RE: Statement to the February OC: the way 
> forward
>
>  
>
> Apologies for coming in so late, but if changes are still being 
> considered I suggest that
>
> - we say 'Internet rights and principles' instead of just 'rights and 
> principles' which in my opinion do not make it what clear what really 
> is meant/ proposed.
>
> - the phrase 'Without invoking legislation or prohibitions' should be 
> removed. I do not think the IGC has a position against invocation of 
> any legislation at all.
>
> - I am strongly in favor of explicitly including the issue of network 
> neutrality (we can call it the issue of an 'open Internet' as evoked 
> in debates around the NN issue or something like that), and we should 
> specifically mention that the next IGF takes up and discusses this 
> issue centrally, in its program. On McTim's objection that NN means 
> different things todifferent people, it is not that the IGC is taking 
> a position on what is meant by NN but only asserting that debates and 
> contestations around this issue are important, central and very 
> topical concerns in the realm of global Internet policy and the IGF 
> must discuss this issue, providing a global democratic platform for 
> public discourse and inputs on this crucial subject.
>
> thanks.
>
> parminder
>
>
> ,
> Ginger Paque wrote:
>
> We have not had comments on the proposed statement to the OC in February.
> Here again is the proposed text for your comment, and the previous email and
> IGC statement can be found below: Please send your comments. Thanks. Ginger
>  
>  
> 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.
>  
> -----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 <mailto: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=fals <http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=false&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfootnote3sym>
> _e&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfootno <http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=false&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfootnote3sym>_
> _te3sym> <http://docs.google.com/RawDocContents?docID=dcskr5r9_7n2dnxhs&justBody=false&revision=_latest&timestamp=1220550114112&editMode=true&strip=true#sdfootnote3sym>_  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 <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org <mailto: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/20090215/e92cdff8/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