AW: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements

Tue May 5 04:58:54 EDT 2009

I'd agree with you David even though I have nothing to do with being
European. The best practice should be to contact the organizers
directly and even if anyone from the IGC is participating, that should
be a relief to so that atleast what goes on will be shared with the
rest of the CS. As far as EU proceedings are concerned, I usually see
copies of the deliberations taken place appear online. Nothing
sinister unless one participates and isn't allowed to ask questions or
anything or an abrupt stance is taken in the meet that there will be
no multistakeholder participation. Give them a chance and see what
happens instead of prior propaganda of a take over of the activity.

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 11:45 AM, David Goldstein
<goldstein_david at yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> Oh grow up Francis. Just because the EU has an invitation-only event,
> there's no need for you to sulk. Why not contact the relevant people
> yourself and question them and make some suggestions.
>
> Suggesting there are ulterior motives when you have no grounds for such
> except paranoia is going too far.
>
> I'd suggest you are unaware of how the EU operates, or government for that
> matter. Governments regularly consult with people and invite them to discuss
> issues. We should be pleased the EU is being open with what they are doing.
>
> David
>
> ________________________________
> From: Dr. Francis MUGUET <muguet at mdpi.net>
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Roland Perry
> <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>
> Cc: WSIS Civil Soc. WG on Information Networks Governance <gov at wsis-gov.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, 5 May, 2009 11:37:31 AM
> Subject: Re: AW: [governance] hearing on Internet Governance arrangements
>
> Hello
>
> In message <49FDDECC.5060004 at mdpi.net>, at 20:13:32 on Sun, 3 May 2009, Dr.
> Francis MUGUET <muguet at mdpi.net> writes
>
> It appears that the call for those hearings has not been inclusive, if
> not secretive...
> EU Commission hearing on future Internet Governance arrangement  ( 06
> May 2009, Brussels, Belgium )
>
> It's not a "call", the meeting is invitation only - which is not itself
> sinister as the Commission clearly wants to hear from specific organisations
> and people firmly established in the IG space (and attending IGF meetings is
> a plausible indication of that). If that doesn't include you, then you
> should examine why that might be the case.
>
> This is twisted non-inclusive arrogant logic, it is not for the uninvited to
> examine why they are not invited !!!
>  but to the organizers and invited ones to ask questions to themselves....
>
> For example, one question is why  Louis Pouzin, one  the very few european
> internet pioneer is not invited...
> ... but he is invited in Boston...
>
> I am raising the question why a few lobbyist firms are invited instead ?
>
> For logistical reasons participation is by invitation only.
>
> My guess is they couldn't book a bigger room because there's too many other
> meetings going on that day.
>
> You are too kind
> Well, this trick is well known.... this is quite gross...
>
>
> but the call refers to the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) ?
>
> The original invitation
>
> It would be interesting if you are kind enough to post the text of this
> invitation
>
> doesn't mention it at all. This meeting is about IG, not the IGF -
>
> strange...  the agenda of the
> EU Commission hearing on future Internet Governance arrangement ( 06 May
> 2009, Brussels, Belgium )
> includes the WSIS in the first place....
> and the WSIS means the IGF !!!
>
> Hearing on Internet Governance arrangements
> 6 May 2009, 10:00 â€“ 17:15
> Brussels â€“ Charlemagne Building1, Room DURI
>
>
> 09:30 Registration & coffee
> 10:00 Introduction by the Commission
> 10.30 WSIS
> 11.15 Security & stability
> 12.00 The role of governments
> 12.45 Round up morning discussion
> 13.00 Lunch
> 14.15 Accountability and legitimacy
> 15.00 Internationalisation of Internet Governance
> 15:45 Coffee break
> 16:00 Digital divide
> 16.45 Round up afternoon discussion
> 17:00 Concluding remarks
>
> ***
> Theme description
> 1. WSIS: Progress since WSIS- how far are we with the implementation of WSIS
> principles? What are the
> new challenges, if any, since WSIS that should be addressed?
> 2. Security & stability of the Internet remains a key EU priority. What are
> the main threats/chal enges?
> What should the EU be doing about them in particular with a view to their
> international dimension?
> 3. The role of public authorities: How should public authorities, in
> particular governments, respond to their
> responsibilities in view of the importance of the Internet to our economies
> and societies? What lessons,
> if any, should be learnt from the "financial crisis" (e.g. should
> self-regulation for critical infrastructures
> and services be more closely monitored by governments and relevant public
> authorities)? To what
> extent are private sector leadership and stronger governmental and public
> policy making
> complementary and necessary components for the effective management of the
> Internet?
> 4. Accountability and legitimacy: To what extent are self-regulatory
> governance bodies accountable to
> Internet users world-wide? What problems, if any, are posed by the fact that
> many Internet users do
> not participate, even indirectly, in the governance processes? Is it
> necessary to make governance
> fora more accountable to the wider international community and, if so, how?
> 5. Internationalisation of Internet Governance: Is it desirable or necessary
> to ensure fair participation of
> actors in their respective roles from all geographic regions in the future
> shaping of the Internet and if
> so, how? How can situations be avoided where the imposition of a particular
> legal system or
> jurisdiction might disadvantage players from outside the jurisdiction
> concerned?
> 6. Digital divide: The future billions of users wil come largely from
> developing countries. Should the
> existing Internet governance mechanisms be adapted to reflect this evolution
> and, if so, how? Should
> the interests of those who donâ€™t yet have Internet access be represented
> in the policy making
> processes and, if so, how?
>
>
> even if the attendees are all IGF veterans.
>
> but not WSIS veterans...  by the way, the list of the invited is known to
> the invited ?
>
> The lead towards the EuroIGF. should be taken by all open-minded
>  European stakeholders, involved in the IGF process,
> whether in person, or remotely.
>
> Anyone could start a "EuroIGF", there are <geo-region>IGF's springing up all
> over the place. All that happened was that Catherine Trautmann won the
> "first come first served" race for the name.
>
> Is it like a domain name ? !!!
>
> But then nothing much happened (as I have explained before).
>
> There are two ways of looking at an IGF in Europe :
>
> 1) An IG Forum of the EU, with its own organization, mandate distinct from
> the IGF,
> possibly set up by an act of the EU parliament or the EU commission
>
> 2) A subset of the UN IGF whose members are stakeholders from Europe
> ( not only the EU,  but Europe as defined by the Council of Europe )
>
> I would suggest the first one to be called the EuroIGF,
> and the second one the IGF-Europe, they are distinct and complementary,
> and the EuroIGF could fit into the IGF-Europe.
>
> It is possible that the EuroIGF might have a more stronger, effective
> mandate that the IGF.  This could be quite promising....
> However, the way the EuroIGF is brought to birth raises eyesbrows
>
> as Meryem observed
> Business (and when I say business, I really mean the business sector) as
> usual on other issues. IG seems to be seen as a consumer issue only.
> and as Jean Louis  recently posted :
>  EU Commissioner Viviane Reding has already worked out the Meeting (draft)
> Report and proposes it for possible minor amendments and endorsement (see
> below) by the "invited partipants".
>
> The EuroIGF process is not starting well, to say the least...
>
> Civil Society should start to promote ASAP an open, transparent
> multistakeholder
>  IGF-Europe, with all stakeholders, EU or non-EU,  to counterbalance
> the lobbies that seem to have taken control  of the EuroIGF process
>
> Best
>
> Francis
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Francis F. MUGUET Ph.D
>
> MDPI Foundation Open Access Journals
> http://www.mdpi.org   http://www.mdpi.net
> muguet at mdpi.org       muguet at mdpi.net
>
> ENSTA/KNIS  http://knis.org
> 32 Blvd Victor 75739 PARIS cedex FRANCE
> Phone: (33)1 45 52 60 19  Fax: (33)1 45 52 52 82
> muguet at ensta.fr   http://www.ensta.fr/~muguet
>
> PC4D : http://www.pc4d.org
>
> World Summit On the Information Society (WSIS)
> Civil Society Working Groups
> Scientific Information :  http://www.wsis-si.org  chair
> Patents & Copyrights   :  http://www.wsis-pct.org co-chair
> Financing Mechanismns  :  http://www.wsis-finance.org web
> Info. Net. Govermance  :  http://www.wsis-gov.org  web
>
> NET4D : http://www.net4D.org
> UNMSP : http://www.unmsp.org
> WTIS : http://www.wtis.org   REUSSI : http://www.reussi.org
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Legal notice :
> Except stated explicitely,
> this message shall not be construed as the official position
> of above mentionned entities
>
> Notice légale ;
> A moins que cela ne soit explicitement indiqué,
> ce message ne constitue la position officielle
> des entités mentionnées ci-dessos
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> Yahoo!7 recommends that you update your browser to the new Internet Explorer
> 8. Get it now..
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 

Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad Bajwa
@skBajwa
Answering all your technology questions
http://www.askbajwa.com
http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa
____________________________________________________________
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