[governance] Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

[michael gurstein]

Colleagues,

I've been re-reading the below and I guess I'm uneasy with this (and with my
earlier "endorsement") as it is now presented.

I'm uneasy for a couple of reasons:
	First I don't see in the current formulation any real reference to
"development" as I normally use the term i.e. referring to economic and
social "development" rather than software "development"... I thought
initially there might be some way of linking the two conceptually in this
formulation but now looking at the formulation below I'm not so sure

	Second, as I've said in the past, I'm not very well versed in the
use of the "Rights" concepts in these contexts but again on the face of it
it now seems to me that the notion of a "Right to Internet development" is,
as it is being presented below, rather too narrow and in a sense group
specific (i.e. a right for Internet software developers to do what they do)
and in that sense represents a debasing of the overall concept of "Rights".
In my naïve view the invocation of the "Rights" formulations should probably
be reserved for rather more basic and inclusive areas of application. If the
notion being presented here is something on the order of a "Right to a free
and open Internet" then I think it should probably be stated in some sort of
similarly general terms i.e. terms that don't on the face of it seem simply
to empower those with the technical capability to contribute to the
(software) development of the Net. 

But again, perhaps I've misread the formulation and if so I would ask for
some additional clarification (and perhaps elaboration or clarification of
the proposed position statement).

Best to all,

MBG

-----Original Message-----
From: McTim [mailto:dogwallah at gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2010 7:23 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Separate statement on themes for Vilnius


All

On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> On 29/01/2010, at 6:36 PM, Parminder wrote:
>
> and add, two substantive themes - development agenda and HR - for IGF
> Vilnius.... these are our long standing demands.... and what is the 
> point not to suggest even broad areas for themes, when the present 
> meeting will decide the themes, and a good part of the IGF is about 
> these key themes for each IGF.
>
> I will suggest we also propose 'Network Neutrality or Open Internet'
> as a theme (good work was done on this theme by IGC co-sponsored 
> workshop in IGF Sharm on this issue, and this work should be taken 
> forward in a main session
> now)
>
> Ginger will be at the open consultation meeting and can deliver an
> oral statement on themes for the Vilnius meeting, separately to our 
> statement looking back at Sharm el Sheikh.  It is entirely appropriate 
> to split up our statements like this, and there is precedent for it. 
> So, let's get to work on such a statement now.

Done (rewritten our statement from pre-Egypt:

IGC Statement on Themes for IGF 2010

The Internet Governance Caucus supports the "Right to
Internet Development" as a major theme for IGF-5 in Vilnius. This should
lead to discourse at the IGF meetings moving towards the definition and
clarification of Principles and Best Practices in relation to Internet
policy development, and how they relate to pre-existing conditions in
Internet Governance. It also includes a space for discussions about the
responsibilities of all parties.

This concept of "rights" continues to stress the importance of openness,
transparency and bottom up Internet policy and standards development. This
framework will continue to emphasize the significant theme of the need to
maintain interoperability and openness to ensure the continued availability
of the Internet ‘commons’, while adding the important issues of devices,
content and applications of their choice. In keeping with current national
and international debates regarding an "open Internet" and relevant aspects
of the often confusing network neutrality discussions.

Net neutrality can often mean different things to different people. The IGC
feels that at a minimum, net neutrality discussions in the IGF should
recognize the principle of nondiscrimination of Internet traffic based on
the ownership, source, destination, port or protocol, keeping in mind that
providers must actively manage their networks in the face of growing threats
from SPAM, DDOS attacks and other forms of abuse. this principle must apply
to both wireless and wireline broadband infrastructure.

The inclusion of "principles" allows for wide discussion of the
responsibilities that the different stakeholders have to each other. It
allows for open examination of the principles that govern Internet policy
making.

Given that Internet development and innovation contributes significantly to
economic and social development, the IGC strongly supports the rights of
people everywhere to contribute to the continued eveolution of the Internet
and its policy and standards making bodies.

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
2010 in Latvia as a proven method to include new voices. Best Practices in
this area would be a sub-theme of the Right to Internet Development.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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=

____________________________________________________________
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