[governance] Re: Separate statement on themes for Vilnius
Parminder
parminder at itforchange.net
Sun Jan 31 05:49:05 EST 2010
Ian Peter wrote:
> 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.
In fact the stated workshop has done quite a good compilation of its
discussions, and as a co-sponsor of the workshop we should seek a full
main session on this theme. If US considers NN as the key Internet
policy issue right now, it could hardly be otherwise for the rest of the
world. I find it rather repugnant that we should wait for FCC of US to
pronounce its verdict on NN, and define it, and rest of us adopt it by
default. This is what i call as the dangerous new age imperialism
facilitated by the digital one-ness of the world, which is controlled
closely by some dominant actors - countries and companies, and rest of
us are supposes to sit back and 'enjoy' the immense benefaction that is
bestowed on us in from of new ICTs.
On the main theme on development agenda, I think there have been enough
right noises last year that such a call may get accepted. There also has
been a 3 hour workshop on it last time. I think the whole idea of what
are the differential interests of developing countries in the new
socio-political digital landscape is perhaps the single most important
issue that needs to be worked on at present. So we should certainly call
for a 'development agenda in IG' main session.
>
> 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 --
While I myself suggested the 'Internet and human rights' agenda, there
is a certain complexity here. This is the year where states will vie -
the more active actors certainly will - to get some text written in the
decree for IGF renewal as per their interests and priorities. I do fear
that more we harp on human rights the chances are, and i merely
speculate here, and do invite comments, that some countries would insist
bringing in text like 'all issues like human rights, global warming etc
which have a clear home in the UN system for discussion should be
discussed at appropriate forums and IGF should only .......'.
I do think that any such text will be very very difficult to get
through, and will be strongly resisted by US, EU etc, but what if it
becomes a bargaining chip for voting for renewal at all or not... Again,
speculation, but thought I would put my thoughts out for consideration
of IGC members.
On the other hand, though with a nil chance of acceptance of a main
session on 'HR and the Internet', I do believe that all such CS
struggles are long haul, and every year at least chipping a bit is
needed, which could be a justification for us calling for such a main
session for IGF Vilnius.
> if anyone has suggestions on how we might achieve this I would be
> interested.
I think the way to do it is to position positive rights vis a vis the
Internet right up there along with negative (formal) rights, and make
developing countries see that we really mean to look at all aspects,
really seriously. But I think for that, we have some way to go within
the CS itself, but that is the direction we should be aiming at.
Parminder
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
> *Reply-To: *<governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Jeremy Malcolm
> <jeremy at ciroap.org>
> *Date: *Sun, 31 Jan 2010 16:40:27 +0800
> *To: *<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>
> _
> 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
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100131/c4679966/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
More information about the Governance
mailing list