[governance] Reposting Workshop 3: Transnational enforcement of a new information order – Issues of rights and democracy

[Parminder]

Hi Bill

Will first deal with the 'quibble' , because it sets up the rest of my 
argument.

 >> Internet is shaping a new global information and knowledge paradigm 
or order. (Parminder)

 > Small quibble, paradigms and social orders are not the same thing. (Bill)

'Or' here is not used to suggest same-ness, but to mean 'whichever way 
one may be inclined to take it'. Information and communication (I & C) 
paradigm would  a more conservative, perhaps functionalist, way to 
seeing it, and 'I & C order' a more political way, perhaps even 
suggesting power imbalances, dominations etc.

The suggested tittle of the workshop 'Transnational (or trans-border) 
enforcement of a new information order – Issues of rights and democracy' 
deliberately  carries the  term  'order'.

What is suggested is not so much one-off enforcements (though that 
issues is also implicated) but an overall enforcement of a new 'I and C' 
order through ACTA like globally non-democratic treaties which would of 
course either  become the default on which big companies will provide or 
withdraw service (private enforcements) or/ and its provisions will be 
more or less forced upon less powerful countries through bilateral FTAs.

Also to note that officials associated with FTA have often said this is 
strictly about 'enforcement' and not new IP regimes, but many in the 
civil society and some others think it is a new IP regime with clear 
global aspirations and implications.

(The main term used in the workshop name is 'transnational enforcement' 
and 'trans-border enforcement' is included as one part within it).

It is significant to see that on the Internet 'borders' have a very 
different meanings, and trans-border enforcements thus take very 
different dimensions. Would cutting off services and connectivity for IP 
violation also operate at and through global interconnection points 
and/or through recognising IP address of some countries? Some such 
things already happen.

We would also like to include trade embargo issues on the Internet - 
like denial of many services by US based companies to countries like 
Iran and Syria, and well, also, Pakistan ( e-payment services for 
instance). In fact, such trade embargo issues are mentioned in the 
Vilnius program document.

 >After all, ACTA is a plurilateral response to the increasing 
difficulties its protagonists have faced getting their way >in 
multilateral settings like WIPO, and to the perceived inadequacies and 
costs of building an architecture through >unilateral imposition and 
bilateral FTAs...

While we should certainly compare  WIPO  and ACTA  settings, and that is 
a central intention of the proposed workshop, the above seem to me  to 
be letting off ACTA protagonists too easily, and simplisitically. But 
you are of course entitled to your views, and these can be discussed at 
the proposed workshop.

 It is my view that, what problems they face at WIPO have largely to do 
with the fact that these protagonists are in a hurry to construct a 
maximalist global IP architecture to ensure that it becomes the basis 
for their continued global domination.

But please do suggest changes to the workshop note, as may others.

Parminder

William Drake wrote:
> Hi
>
> Parminder could you help me to understand the desired focus?  To 
> me, trans-border enforcement connotes a government or other actor 
> based in one territorial unit unilaterally establishing/enforcing 
> rules applicable in other units, i.e. extraterritoriality.  If memory 
> serves this was the focus of the IGC workshop we were on in Hyderabad. 
>  In contrast, ACTA and the UNESCO treaty (which will be hard to 
> 'enforce') involve the negotiated harmonization of rules, with 
> enforcement being an undertaking each government commits to within its 
> jurisdiction.  These are rather different architectures, no?
>
> If the driving interest here is unilateral/extraterritorial, I'd 
> suggest picking cases in which that model's been followed and 
> comparing, generalizing.  If instead it is the substantive policy 
> problem of IPR, maybe it'd be interesting to frame this as a 
> comparative assessment of different policy architectures for that? 
>  After all, ACTA is a plurilateral response to the increasing 
> difficulties its protagonists have faced getting their way in 
> multilateral settings like WIPO, and to the perceived inadequacies and 
> costs of building an architecture through unilateral imposition and 
> bilateral FTAs...Just a suggestion.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
> PS: Small quibble, paradigms and social orders are not the same thing.
>
>
> On Apr 11, 2010, at 3:26 PM, Parminder wrote:
>
>> Attempting a  quick first draft for the proposed workshop.
>>
>> Proposed workshop title : 'Transnational (or trans-border) 
>> enforcement of a new information order – Issues of rights and democracy'
>>
>> Internet is shaping a new global information and knowledge paradigm 
>> or order. In this respect, many technical issues interact with 
>> institutional frameworks around information and knowledge - like IP, 
>> but also FoE, cultural rights etc - to develop a unique and 
>> unprecedented global system of information and knowledge flows and 
>> controls. Trans-border institutional mechanism become a key issue in 
>> this regards - and trans-border enforcement of IP laws is a strongly 
>> contested subject right now. The pluri-lateral treaty 
>> 'Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Act', currently being negotiated has been 
>> in the eye of the storm, both vis a vis local constituencies in the 
>> countries which are a part of the negotiation, and developing 
>> countries who fear that such treaties negotiated without their 
>> participation may become the default global institutional framework, 
>> including through bilateral FTAs .
>>
>> Apart from IP issues, trans-border enforcement on and through the 
>> Internet also has implications for FoE and cultural rights regimes 
>> (For instance the recent UNECSO treaty on cultural goods).
>>
>> The proposed workshop will address the above issues, specifically 
>> employing the lenses of rights (right to knowledge, FoE, cultural 
>> rights etc) and democracy (right to self determination and political 
>> participation).
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100415/3a4b731e/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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t