[governance] Wikileaks - ISOC

[Lee W McKnight]

Milton wrote a nice piece for the IGP blog on the Wikileaks issue....check out the newslettter we sent around yesterday. The Wikileaks thing from an IGC perspective is not about 'supporting' WikiLeaks,  but about supporting open, transparent, governance of...critical Internet resources or however we phrase it for a broader audience to significantly raise the profile of IGC.

So yeah I agree timing is good to play off Wikileaks to highlight our broader concerns, highlighted by Wikileaks and the CSTD shenanigans.

Lee
________________________________________
From: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org [governance-request at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 3:56 AM
To: Jeremy Malcolm; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Wikileaks - ISOC

>Do we want to say "we support Wikileaks" or do we want to say "we disapprove of the (lack of) process that has been followed in dealing with Wikileaks, and we think that a set of principles should be >democratically developed to guide public and private responses in future similar circumstances"?  Whilst I personally support Wikileaks, I think that the latter approach is more within the IGC's area of >core competence, and would also distinguish our statement better from those of free speech groups et al.

Along the lines of the latter I think – we can say recent events such as those concerning Wikileaks highlight the need for....

While arguing for the development of specific processes, we can also be critical of the sorts of actions that have been taken in the absence of such guidelines and the futility and ineffectiveness of  un co-ordinated approaches taking place in the absence of established legal protocols.



________________________________
From: Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 16:00:05 +0800
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Wikileaks - ISOC

On 09/12/2010, at 2:53 PM, Ian Peter wrote:

So far we have seen everydns, mastercard, amazon and paypal cave in to political pressure, although there is no legal action against wikileaks, let alone a successful one. On the other hand, ISOC (and presumably PIR) and Facebook of all bedfellows have stood firmly on the side of a free Internet.

and Twitter.

I think an IGC statement on this issue would be useful!

Do we want to say "we support Wikileaks" or do we want to say "we disapprove of the (lack of) process that has been followed in dealing with Wikileaks, and we think that a set of principles should be democratically developed to guide public and private responses in future similar circumstances"?  Whilst I personally support Wikileaks, I think that the latter approach is more within the IGC's area of core competence, and would also distinguish our statement better from those of free speech groups et al.

--
Jeremy Malcolm
Project Coordinator
Consumers International
Kuala Lumpur Office for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
Lot 5-1 Wisma WIM, 7 Jalan Abang Haji Openg, TTDI, 60000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Tel: +60 3 7726 1599
CI is 50
Consumers International marks 50 years of the global consumer movement in 2010.
Celebrate with us as we continue to support, promote and protect consumer rights around the world.
http://www.consumersinternational.org/50 <http://www.consumersinternational.org/50>

Read our email confidentiality notice <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765> . Don't print this email unless necessary.


____________________________________________________________
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