[governance] G8 Deauville Declaration

Sun May 29 03:21:17 EDT 2011

Dear Wolfgang,

Thanks for pointing to the missing ICANN link in the Deauville Decleration. Looking at the Principles, I think that this doesn't come as a surprise. If someone sees a „key role“ for governments with regard to IG public policy making, it's consequent not to mention a setting in which government clearly don't have this key role. My feeling is that among governments ICANN is widely accepted now a a technical coordination body, but at the same time there is a growing discomfort with civil servants travelling around the world on the tax payers account to advice an US private entity. If I would work for a national Federal Audit Office, I would at least take a closer look. For many reasons, including the legal setting, governments will never be able to exercise „ultimate public policy authority“ in the ICANN framework. My expectation is that in the long run the GAC part of ICANN will be outsourced to some kind of new or existing IGO. And than we will have lots of fun to debate the formal link between ICANN and that entity.

P.S.: I'm well aware of the fact that people on this list have different views regarding the public policy authority of governments, and that's good. In my opinion, something like Germany's now surprisingly quick exit from nuclear energy would not be possible in a „nuclear industry led bottom-up multi-stakeholder forum“. What we learned since the early years of the industrial revolution is that it's sometimes helpful to have strong political power to balance economic power.

Cheers,

Michael

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Gesendet: 28.05.2011 10:40:10
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Michael Leibrandt" <michael_leibrandt at web.de>, "Adam Peake" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>, governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: AW: [governance] G8 Deauville Declaration

Thanks Michael

this is a helpful re-reading of the diplomatic Deauville text by somebody who knows how such texts ermerge.

Here are two additional comments:

The first point refers to the basic values and to balance conflicting values. From a CS perspective it is very helpful that freedom, democracy and human rights is seen by the eight governments as a central value with regard to the Internet. (para 5, 7 and others). This includes that all efforts to protect other values have to designed in a way that they do NOT undermine freedom, democracy and human rights. The challenge - not touched by the Deauville Declaration - is the right balance in the concrete areas. And here a lot work ist still be done. To be frank I do not see a great step forward since Geneva 2003/Tunis 2005, in contrary there are some steps backwards.

If I compare Articel 42 from the WSIS Geneva Declaration (2003) with the Para.15 of the Deauville Declaration than on the first look this it is more or less the same general language, lacking any precise recommendation how to balance IP protection and access to knowledge. But a second look tells that Deauville can be seen as a step backwards from a citizens point of view. Here are the two texts:

WSIS Geneva 42: "Intellectual Property protection is important to encourage innovation and creativity in the Information Society; similarly, the wide dissemination, diffusion, and sharing of knowledge is important to encourage innovation and creativity."

G 8 Deauville 15: "With regard to the protection of intellectual property, in particular copyright, trademarks, trade secrets and patens, we recognize the need to have national laws and frameworks for improved enforcement. ... We are committed to identifying ways of facilitating greater access and openness to knowledge, eduaction and culture.

This is very "parential" and brings the IP community into a leading role that they will offer "help to identify ways" how people access knowledge, education and culture. This pushes the user in a more passive situation. He has to wait what the "ways" will be which (generously) are offered to him (top down) for access to knowledge. In my eyes, this is a step backwards.

My second comment goes along the multistakeholder principle. It is a good signal, that the G 8 support clearly in Para. 20 the "multistakeholder model of Internet Governance" as a key principle. Also in other Paras. the G8 refer to multistakeholderism. But if you read the text very carefully, than the G 8 MS model is "multistakeholderism under governmental leadership". The Deauville declaration avoids the terminologgy from WGIG /WSIS which says that all stakeholders participate "in their respective role" (which didn´t say anything about "leadership"). In contrast the G 8 gives governments a "key role". The other stakeholders are invited to help to bridge the digital divide (para 19) and to stimulate the evolution of the Internet economy (para.21). But if it comes to policy development which results in norms and principles than the non-governmental stakeholders - in the eyes of the G 8 - should just "inform" the govenrment so that govenrments can make informed decisions when they develop norms of behaviour and common approaches in the use of cyberspace." (para. 17). This is said in the context of the security paragraph (17), but the context offers that this is also the G 8 proposal for general policy making in the field of cyberspace. Also this is a step backwards with regard to the Tunis Agenda from 2005.

The WGIG definition, adopted by the heads of states (including the G8) in 2005 says: "Internet governance is the development and application by governments, the private sector and civil society, in their respective roles, of shared principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes that shape the evolution and use of the Internet." The G 8 avoids to use the language of "sharing" in the development of principles, norms, rules, decision making procedures and programmes. The G 8 reflects the old hierarchical model: Non-governmental stakeholders can inform (lobby, protest etc.) governments but are excluded in the development of the norms which will rule them. PDP and decison making remains in the hand of the G8 governments. This is top down and not bootm up. ASnd the whole process how the Deauville Declaration was drafted was also not transparent.

Anyhow it makes sense to study the text carefully and - as Michael has proposed - to look also what was ignored in the text. One point which is not touched by the Deauville Declaration is "Critical Internet Resources" and ICANN (IGF and OECD are mentioned by name).

Bit more deeper analysis will bring more discoveries.

Best regards

wolfgang

________________________________

Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Michael Leibrandt
Gesendet: Fr 27.05.2011 22:50
An: Adam Peake; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Betreff: Re: [governance] G8 Deauville Declaration

Thanks Adam. Always worth reading G8 Declarations carefully, because quite a number of high-level people had worked on it for months, using diplomatic language in which those things left out are often the real message. My very first impressions:

"Governments, the private sector, users, and other stakeholders all have a role to play in creating an environment in which the Internet can flourish in a balanced manner."

***Even more interesting than the order is the recognition of a 4th stakeholder group. Besides the users there is still a significant part of the society that is - for one reason or the other - not using the net but at the same being affected by the net (as pedestrians are in an automotive community...). Those people don't have a voice yet, and it therefore should be welcomed that the G8 made this statement.

"In Deauville in 2011, for the first time at Leaders' level, we agreed, in the presence of some leaders of the Internet economy, on a number of key
principles, including freedom, respect for privacy and intellectual property, multi-stakeholder governance, cyber-security, and protection from crime, that underpin a strong and flourishing Internet."

***The adoption of G8 Principles on Internet Governance together with key players of the business community is more than most observers expected and will definitely have an influence on the future IG debate.

"These principles, together with those of non-discrimination and fair competition, must continue to be an essential force behind its development."

***This might be seen as a strong statement for Net Neutrality. Also mentioned further down.

"Their implementation must be included in a broader framework: that of respect for the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, the protection of
intellectual property rights, which inspire life in every democratic society for the benefit of all citizens. We strongly believe that freedom and security, transparency and respect for confidentiality, as well as the exercise of individual rights and responsibility have to be achieved simultaneously."

***This seems to be an attempt to define what "public interest" might be with regard to IG.

"In this respect, action from all governments is needed through national policies, but also through the promotion of international cooperation."

***A strong believe that even in the global Internet age nation states have a role to play, but need to act hand in hand ("all"). Quite similiar approach as, for example, in the field of tax evasion.

"The security of networks and services on the Internet is a multi-stakeholder issue."

***So other issues are not a multi-stakeholder issue?

"Governments have a role to play, informed by a full range of stakeholders, in helping to develop norms of behaviour and common approaches in
the use of cyberspace."

***Cleary defining a superior role for governments and a supporting role for others.

"As we support the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance, we call upon all stakeholders to contribute to enhanced cooperation within and between all international fora dealing with the governance of the Internet. [...] Governments have a key role to play in this model."

***Again, "key role" points to a superior role.

"We welcome the meeting of the e-G8 Forum which took place in Paris on 24 and 25 May, on the eve of our Summit and reaffirm our commitment to the kinds of
multi-stakeholder efforts that have been essential to the evolution of the Internet economy to date."

***Sentence would have sounded even better without inserting "economy" at the end, so that's not by accident...

"We look forward to the forthcoming opportunities to strengthen international
cooperation in all these areas, including the Internet Governance Forum scheduled next September in Nairobi and other relevant UN events, the OECD High Level Meeting on "The Internet Economy: Generating Innovation and Growth" scheduled next June in Paris, the London International Cyber Conference scheduled next November, and the Avignon Conference on Copyright scheduled next November, as positive steps in taking this important issue forward."

***Full G8 endorsement for the IGF, but has to been seen in light of the statements above.

Michael

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: "Adam Peake" <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
Gesendet: 27.05.2011 20:32:09
An: Governance <governance at lists.cpsr.org>
Betreff: [governance] G8 Deauville Declaration

<http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/world/20110527-Deauville-G8-Declaration-Final-English.pdf>

Nairobi IGF mentioned. Quite few references to multi- stakeholder
governance. Para 20: "As we support the multi-stakeholder model of
Internet governance, we call upon all stakeholders to contribute to
enhanced cooperation within and between all international fora dealing
with the governance of the Internet." plus "Governments have a key
role to play in this model."

People less sleepy than me, please read.

Next year?

Adam
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/

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

___________________________________________________________
Schon gehört? WEB.DE hat einen genialen Phishing-Filter in die
Toolbar eingebaut! http://produkte.web.de/go/toolbar
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/

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

___________________________________________________________
Schon gehört? WEB.DE hat einen genialen Phishing-Filter in die
Toolbar eingebaut! http://produkte.web.de/go/toolbar
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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