[governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

Lee W McKnight lmcknigh at syr.edu
Sun Jan 31 22:47:13 EST 2010 

ok parminder, as long you assure me net neutrality doesn't mean what some thought it meant in IGF context I will be flexible : )

But just to clarify, the phrase 'open internet' is not a new fcc invention, it has been around as a core design principle from beginning.  
________________________________________
From: Parminder [parminder at itforchange.net]
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 10:14 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Lee W McKnight
Cc: Ian Peter
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

Lee

The rest of the world may be  a little behind US on this debate, and Network Neutrality (NN) terms makes clearer sense to most. On the other hand open Internet is  a little less clear as to its precise meaning. For instance, 'openness' as an IGF theme has mostly dealt with entirely different issues. Also IGC and Diplo Foundation co-sponsored workshop went with the NN label and could get most of the discussion focus on the right points. Let us not be hung up on one name or the other as far as we can make the judgment on what name would convey the right (or thereabout) meaning to most in an IGF setting. Nobody today seriously believes that NN means absolutely no network management at all, even for issues like security.

May I propose we call it 'Network Neutrality - Ensuring an Open Internet Architecture'


Parminder

Lee W McKnight wrote:

Like Ian i am happier I am happier with the phrase 'open internet;' but would rather drop the phrase net neutrailty altogether.  If I can't persuade rest of you to go along with that, then at least open internet should come 1st and net neutrality phrase 2nd.

In sum: I strongly support an IGC statement calling for 'Open Internet' to be a main theme.

My rationale: frankly 'net neutrality' as a stand-alone phrase is very 2008/dated.

For example: The FCC launched an openinternet.gov website; and 'open internet' notice of proposed rulemaking - sometimes referred to as net neutrailty rulemaking, but that's not what the FCC is calling it. Reply comments are due march 5th if we/IGC care to comment ; ).

From the FCC's openinternet.gov website:

Get Informed about the Open Internet
    * Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

About the Open Internet NPRM
What Is the Open Internet, and What Does the FCC Have To Do With It?

The "open Internet" is the Internet as we know it. It’s "open" because it uses free, publicly available standards that anyone can access and build to, and because it treats all traffic that flows across the network in roughly the same way. This means an innovator in a garage or a student in a dorm room can easily invent and launch a new online service, and that content from a small business or a blogger can reach customers and audiences as easily as content from a multinational corporation or a major newspaper. Once you’re online, you don’t have to ask permission or pay tolls to broadband providers to reach others on the network. If you develop an innovative new website, you don’t have to get permission to share it with the world. Many believe that this freedom to communicate and innovate without permission is a big cause of the Internet’s remarkable success.

But the Internet’s openness appears to face some emerging challenges, such as incidents where broadband providers have restricted the applications their customers can use over their Internet connections, a lack of transparency about how consumers’ Internet service will function, and congestion on the network.

In light of these emerging challenges and uncertainties about existing policies, last month the FCC began a process to seek public input on draft rules of the road that would clarify and supplement current FCC policies to protect the open Internet. These basic, high-level rules would ensure that broadband providers don’t block consumers from accessing the content and applications of their choice, don’t deprive consumers of their entitlement to competition, and don’t discriminate against or in favor of traffic, and they would require broadband providers to disclose basic information about broadband service. Recognizing that the proposed framework needs to balance potentially competing interests while helping to ensure an open, safe, and secure Internet, the draft rules would permit broadband providers to engage in reasonable network management, including but not limited to efforts to block spam and ensure that heavy users don’t crowd out other users.

To launch the rulemaking process, the Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, often referred to as the "open Internet NPRM." As the FCC always does when it considers new rules, it has asked the public for input, and anyone may submit comments over a period of several months. After the deadline for comments has passed and the FCC has reviewed the public’s input, the FCC’s five Commissioners may vote to adopt rules on these issues.
________________________________________
From: Ian Peter [ian.peter at ianpeter.com<mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com>]
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 4:21 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

I’d certainly like to see network neutrality/ open internet advanced as a theme, and seeing net neutrality can be so confusing I’d like to see open Internet added after it.

IGC co sponsored a very successful three hour workshop on this at Sharm with Diplo. There are many issues, content neutrality probably sitting highest in my mind. Its worthy of a main session as the current main session themes we have repeated for some years are getting a little tired.

And yes we should continue to support the human rights and development agendas. We need to find a way to overcome the block on rights discussions which was evident last year – if anyone has suggestions on how we might achieve this I would be interested.




________________________________
From: Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org><mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>
Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org><mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org><mailto:jeremy at ciroap.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 16:40:27 +0800
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org><mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Subject: [governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for Vilnius

On 29/01/2010, at 6:47 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:

So, let's get to work on such a statement now.  I don't think it needs to be very long, and indeed we could just put forward some bullet points for Ginger to elaborate upon on the day.  So far we have on the table the following substantive themes:

* Human rights
* Development agenda
* Network neutrality/Open Internet

Comments, please, particularly on the last of these which Parminder has just introduced?

With just over a week to go there have still been no comments on this thread so far, so I will try to summarise some of the arguments that are usually made for and against this theme, as a way of kick-starting discussion:

FOR:

Network neutrality (or "open Internet") emphasises the interest of Internet users in being able, by default, to access content, services and applications free from corporate or governmental interference (though there are cases in which compelling interests may require exceptions to this general principle).  Network neutrality also stands for the treatment of intermediaries (again, by default) as conduits for information, rather than gatekeepers who bear liability for the content they carry.

AGAINST:

Network neutrality is a confusing phrase with many different meanings to different people.  For example it is still wrongly thought of as preventing individual network operators from managing their bandwidth, which will only lead to misunderstandings in Vilnius (like the arguments over whether "critical Internet resources" includes electricity).  On the other hand "Open Internet" doesn't seem to add anything to the existing "Openness" theme, so why not just keep using that existing theme instead?
--
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><http://www.consumersinternational.org/50>

Read our email confidentiality notice <http://www.consumersinternational.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=100521&int1stParentNodeID=89765><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<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org<mailto: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<mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org<mailto: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

More information about the Governance mailing list