[governance] A U.N. grab for Internet control?

[jlfullsack]

I partly agree Ian's opinion in the two last paragraphs of his mail. I'd just remind our list members the position of the large majority of the DCs through the whole WSIS  that strongly supported the idea of UN/ITU -or ITU-only- be involved in IG. Unfortunately, actual DCs are not present in the IGF process for obvious reasons. On our list we are "listening to the same tenors" all year long". That's quite fine but not sufficient for me : since I do like music (and a lot of other list members do as well) I want "to listen carefully the whole choir" ! This is far more more interesting ! And really inclusive as we aked for in our WSIS Declarations !

Therefore, in my opinion, CS should advocate in some way the position of absent DCs by considering these options in the debate on IG(F)'s Future. 



Of course, in my opinion this IG evolution issue is strongly linked to the (urgent) ITU move towards a really CS-open UN Agency, like e.g. Unesco. And this is another battle to be fought by the CS, as asked for i.a. by Bill Drake. 



Let's try to be as consistent as possible in our longer term views, and have in mind both these issues when defining our strategy and proposals for IG evolution, or better said when trying to shape the "post-ICANN" Internet policy.



All the best for you in 2009 !



Jean-Louis Fullsack





----- Original Message ----- 

  From: Ian Peter 
  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org ; 'Karl E. Peters' 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 6:45 AM
  Subject: RE: [governance] A U.N. grab for Internet control?


  Karl, the debate has moved on a little since 2003 and the article you mention. There remains widespread opposition to the two unilateral roles the US government continues to hold in the ICANN/IANA space (the JPA and the root zone authorization roles) - this is opposed by a significant number of governments, most groups within civil society, and significant groups within the private sector and technical communities.

   

  However this does not mean necessarily a "UN takeover". China to a degree restated its position during the Hyderabad meeting, to say "all governments or no governments". Put another way, this might mean an equal role for all governments. There is a lot of room to define what that role is (if any) and how it might be reflected in internet governance structures.

   

  That's a long way from any "UN takeover". I don't think that is on many agendas now, although some would argue for a stronger ITU role. But I think it's fair to say that many positions are evolving during the IGF process and not too many are absolute. 

   

  Ian Peter

  PO Box 429

  Bangalow NSW 2479

  Australia

  Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773

  www.ianpeter.com

   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  From: Karl E. Peters [mailto:kpeters at tldainc.org] 
  Sent: 06 January 2009 16:04
  To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Adam Peake
  Subject: RE: [governance] A U.N. grab for Internet control?

   

      Please do not confuse old with irrelevant! Is this no longer concern to you in any way because you already read it? That's a bit perplexing... What has happened since to make this a non-issue? I am new to the list and simply wondered what participants on an internet governance list thought about proposed changes to internet governance.

  -Karl E. Peters

   

    -------- Original Message --------
    Subject: Re: [governance] A U.N. grab for Internet control?
    From: Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
    Date: Mon, January 05, 2009 10:52 pm
    To: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Karl E. Peters" <kpeters at tldainc.org>

    >
    Karl, see the date of the article, Posted: December 02, 2003

    Not so relevant now.

    Adam




    >Just read an intriguing article on the Internet and desire of many 
    >to place it under the UN. Any here either for or against such a plan 
    >in any noticeable way? Please read article linked below...
    >
    >A U.N. grab for Internet control?
    >Proposal expected at global summit in Geneva
    >
    >To view the entire article, visit 
    ><http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=22075>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=22075
    >
    >-Karl E. Peters
    >
    >____________________________________________________________
    >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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20090107/33287cfe/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