From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct 31 18:16:45 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 22:16:45 +0000
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxisMaaYgxuqSYdECRW+c9mPj56Rp4Aej3orCW46JhzhAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1320081340.82295.yint-ygo-j2me@web161005.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <GYK4kj5rgvrOFAbr@internetpolicyagency.com>
 <CACAaNxisMaaYgxuqSYdECRW+c9mPj56Rp4Aej3orCW46JhzhAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Voz84JBN5xrOFAbe@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message 
<CACAaNxisMaaYgxuqSYdECRW+c9mPj56Rp4Aej3orCW46JhzhAA at mail.gmail.com>, at 
22:46:48 on Mon, 31 Oct 2011, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> writes
>>> 3. Increase the number of the membership (count) of MAG Members to have
>>> at least two members from each Country, one from CS and one from Internet
>>> Regulating Authority from the same Country.
>>
>> That makes the MAG begin to sound like an ITU summit with perhaps 400
>> attendees. That's a rather different animal from the current one.
>
>exactly, and ~half of them would be regulators??  How is that balanced?

Making it country-based might be convenient for some stakeholders, but 
it's not the traditional way that business and the technical community 
have been represented in the past. Would there be 192 of each of those 
invited as well?
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 18:28:43 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 20:28:43 -0200
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKhafM7sYyK3gffszhL3G4aARPXh3ttN2LkSPNuig062HQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKhafM7sYyK3gffszhL3G4aARPXh3ttN2LkSPNuig062HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK3AUqPidy6aKo2MrFdb65kaiQ-GF3vwhmFD0yfv=nDYaw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

The complete list of "broad agreements" follow below. They are very general
and commonplace, but if we think that 90% of the text we tried to write on
the last CSTD WG meeting was put inside brackets, it seems positive. If
anything, it was a good dynamics to brake the ice. Tomorrow we will go into
details on topic A (outcomes). May the force be with us.

A - Shaping the outcomes of IGf meetings
Broad agreement on the need to improve the outcome documententation of the
IGF

B - Working modalities including open consultations, MAG and the Secretariat
Broad agreement on the need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
meetings transparent
Broad agreement to have the Secretariat [remain independent and] based in
Geneva
Broad agreement to strengthen/expand the IGF Secretariat
Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
groups that internet governance increasingly impacts
Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and resources
should be strengthened
Broad agreement that the MAG needs a clear terms of reference and that the
constitution of the MAG should be done in a transparent and documented
fashion

C - Funding of the IGF
Broad agreement that additional voluntary funding should be sought,
accepted and encouraged
Broad agreement  that funding should be stable, predictable and independent

D - Broadening participation
Broad agreement that the preparatory process needs to be more visible and
for more stakeholders to participate in it
Broad agreement on the need to reach out to more stakeholders
Broad agreement on the need to enhance remote participation
Broad agreement to increase and support participation from all stakeholder
groups from developing countries  in IGF and its prep process
Broad agreement to increase IG4D topics in the IGF
Broad agreement to continue to rotate the location of the IGF annually, to
enable different regions to have easy access to IGF

L - linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
Broad agreement on the need to encourage greater links between national,
regional and global IGF
Broad agreement on the need to improve the links between the IGF and
intergovernmental organizations and international organizations


Marília

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> In the afternoon, we started to examine if there is broad (and
> minimum) agreement on each of
> the 5 topic categories identified in the morning:
>
> A)      Shaping the outcomes of IGF meetings
> B)      Working modalities including open consultation, MAG and Secretariat
> C)      Funding of the IGF
> D)      Participation – broadening
> E)      Linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
>
> And then we reached the point of confusion – it seems very difficult
> to reach some specific
> agreement or consensus of so many different issues in limited time –
> so that Chair suggested
> to go into three small working groups and come back to plenary.
>
> Several governments showed resistance to this proposal and we went back to
> exploring how to go forward as plenary.
>
> Some governments started to talk about more specifics of item A, and
> then Marilia
> pointed out that we should go over all 5 elements first without going
> into subetantive
> discussions, and we can go more specifics later. That was accepted by the
> group.
>
> Then we agreed (tentatively):
> “B Working modalities including open consultation MAG, and Secretariat
> Broad agreement on need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
> deliberations transparent.
> Broad agreement to strengthen the IGF secretariat”
> Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
> groups that Internet Governance increasingly impacts.
> Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and
> resources should be strengthened.
> Broad agreement that MAG needs clear Terms of Reference, constitution
> of the MAG is done in a transparent and documented fashion.
>
> C Funding of the IGF
> Broad agreement that additional voluntary funding should be sought,
> accepted, and encouraged.
> Broad agreement that funding is stable and predictable and independent.
>
> We have had several rounds of interesting exchanges of different views
> before reaching these broad agreement.
>
> Another Coffee break now.
>
> izumi
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111031/86e35ca2/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, 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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 19:18:07 2011
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:18:07 -0400
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK3AUqPidy6aKo2MrFdb65kaiQ-GF3vwhmFD0yfv=nDYaw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKhafM7sYyK3gffszhL3G4aARPXh3ttN2LkSPNuig062HQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACpVkK3AUqPidy6aKo2MrFdb65kaiQ-GF3vwhmFD0yfv=nDYaw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAC0JwGP7+7OrXi3hx=1TSgqfO2infS-Yg3m0jKBp00PtPhU_8A@mail.gmail.com>

Congrats to all on what looks like some positive outcomes for developing
economies.

Thanks Izumi and Marilia for the great coverage, updates and advocacy.

Rgds,

Tracy
On Oct 31, 2011 6:29 PM, "Marilia Maciel" <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> The complete list of "broad agreements" follow below. They are very
> general and commonplace, but if we think that 90% of the text we tried to
> write on the last CSTD WG meeting was put inside brackets, it seems
> positive. If anything, it was a good dynamics to brake the ice. Tomorrow we
> will go into details on topic A (outcomes). May the force be with us.
>
> A - Shaping the outcomes of IGf meetings
> Broad agreement on the need to improve the outcome documententation of the
> IGF
>
> B - Working modalities including open consultations, MAG and the
> Secretariat
> Broad agreement on the need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
> meetings transparent
> Broad agreement to have the Secretariat [remain independent and] based in
> Geneva
> Broad agreement to strengthen/expand the IGF Secretariat
> Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
> groups that internet governance increasingly impacts
> Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and resources
> should be strengthened
> Broad agreement that the MAG needs a clear terms of reference and that the
> constitution of the MAG should be done in a transparent and documented
> fashion
>
> C - Funding of the IGF
> Broad agreement that additional voluntary funding should be sought,
> accepted and encouraged
> Broad agreement  that funding should be stable, predictable and independent
>
> D - Broadening participation
> Broad agreement that the preparatory process needs to be more visible and
> for more stakeholders to participate in it
> Broad agreement on the need to reach out to more stakeholders
> Broad agreement on the need to enhance remote participation
> Broad agreement to increase and support participation from all stakeholder
> groups from developing countries  in IGF and its prep process
> Broad agreement to increase IG4D topics in the IGF
> Broad agreement to continue to rotate the location of the IGF annually, to
> enable different regions to have easy access to IGF
>
> L - linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
> Broad agreement on the need to encourage greater links between national,
> regional and global IGF
> Broad agreement on the need to improve the links between the IGF and
> intergovernmental organizations and international organizations
>
>
> Marília
>
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>
>> In the afternoon, we started to examine if there is broad (and
>> minimum) agreement on each of
>> the 5 topic categories identified in the morning:
>>
>> A)      Shaping the outcomes of IGF meetings
>> B)      Working modalities including open consultation, MAG and
>> Secretariat
>> C)      Funding of the IGF
>> D)      Participation – broadening
>> E)      Linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
>>
>> And then we reached the point of confusion – it seems very difficult
>> to reach some specific
>> agreement or consensus of so many different issues in limited time –
>> so that Chair suggested
>> to go into three small working groups and come back to plenary.
>>
>> Several governments showed resistance to this proposal and we went back to
>> exploring how to go forward as plenary.
>>
>> Some governments started to talk about more specifics of item A, and
>> then Marilia
>> pointed out that we should go over all 5 elements first without going
>> into subetantive
>> discussions, and we can go more specifics later. That was accepted by the
>> group.
>>
>> Then we agreed (tentatively):
>> “B Working modalities including open consultation MAG, and Secretariat
>> Broad agreement on need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
>> deliberations transparent.
>> Broad agreement to strengthen the IGF secretariat”
>> Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
>> groups that Internet Governance increasingly impacts.
>> Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and
>> resources should be strengthened.
>> Broad agreement that MAG needs clear Terms of Reference, constitution
>> of the MAG is done in a transparent and documented fashion.
>>
>> C Funding of the IGF
>> Broad agreement that additional voluntary funding should be sought,
>> accepted, and encouraged.
>> Broad agreement that funding is stable and predictable and independent.
>>
>> We have had several rounds of interesting exchanges of different views
>> before reaching these broad agreement.
>>
>> Another Coffee break now.
>>
>> izumi
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111031/1ab74dbe/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 19:28:56 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 21:28:56 -0200
Subject: [governance] Re: Indian proposal => "IGF improvements"
In-Reply-To: <06B943D5-5A15-4E16-9C2C-726FE05279B5@uzh.ch>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
	<3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch>
	<4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org>
	<97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch>
	<4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca>
	<999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch>
	<4EA14A95.4020404@apc.org>
	<3B9704FA-0B65-4398-B99A-3B5561468E7C@uzh.ch>
	<CACpVkK39uOKRnh7Cy64M1v5quGi1AgBbw7RWsefXUmS6b-uycw@mail.gmail.com>
	<549EFAF4-B302-4E15-B666-7C167CE71AB8@uzh.ch>
	<CACpVkK0F3KNvA5t-hv7ovJqjWG31SDawQ_Qae4VLSrN7HpRsnA@mail.gmail.com>
	<06B943D5-5A15-4E16-9C2C-726FE05279B5@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK22ip=5hx8ZMugUt_iS6rbXqmzFwUX=LCg2qs0b7wgpgQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Bill,

It is getting late here, so I will take only 2 of your points and come back
on the others later.

On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 5:22 AM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

>
> If an EC mechanism is created, I would never want it to disregard IGF's
> inputs, would you?
>
>
> BILL: I would not want an intergovernmental EC mechanism to be created,
> therefore I would not want the IGF restructured for the purpose of
> providing inputs into it.  But IGF discussions have already influenced
> other sphere, e.g. the OECD's decision to allow TC and CS participation,
> some of ICANN's internal reforms, etc.
>

MARILIA: The discussion about improvements with respect to outcomes is
based on the feeling shared by many actors that the rich discussions that
take place in the IGF have not been captured in a way that: a) can serve as
input in global policy making; b) can be communicated to other bodies; c)
can create a track of IGF discussions, so we can see improvements from year
to year. One proposal advanced by many of us in CS is that more concrete
outcomes should capture convergences and divergent policy options, as
explained in detail before. This improvement would be made after years of
discussion and after many people in IGF have made claims for more concrete
outcomes. It would not be made with the purpose to provide inputs into an
non-existant EC mechanism.

>
> BILL: I have been for a more outcome oriented IGF since before there was
> an IGF.  But if there is an intergovernmental EC mechanism soaking up all
> the attention of governments and generating an untold number of
> irresolvable conflicts, I agree with Milton that IGF could end up
> marginalized.  Many G77 governments have repeatedly demonstrated that they
> don't particularly care about having a space to talk to stakeholders and
> engage in collective learning.  What they want is what's been proposed, an
> UNCTAD of the Internet that nominally can facilitate treaty negotiations
> and GA resolutions.  The model here would not look like OECD deliberations.
>  It'd be more like the CSTD.
>

MARILIA: Well, then you agree that more concrete outcomes are the way to
go, you just don't think it is strategically interesting to move on that
direction. So, if got your point, if there is no EC, outcomes would be
good. But if EC comes into existence, then  outcomes from IGF would become
a bad thing? I dont understand why.
In addition, if the IGF continues for more 5 years without providing more
concrete outcomes, do you really think that it will remain relevant? That
people and organizations who are asking for concrete outcomes will continue
attending happily? That governments will still be there (including western
governments?) Countries who have funding maybe will send one or two low
level officials. But most likely countries will resort to their established
regional platforms. We are currently discussing the meeting in UK. That may
become more frequent. And without a stronger IGF, that sends messaged,
there is little that can be done to prevent that trend, or to call
attention to more legitimately debated policy options.

Best,
Marília



-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111031/75368d07/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 19:32:44 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:32:44 +1300
Subject: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event was Re: []
 Cyber Security 2011
In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B034DA0@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
References: <B11CE329-B4CC-4FDC-A3BC-A80C38218DD5@acm.org>
	<CA+EjHYo+Xd4jS=Fes2SYj5rOGtEVSUfTyufmDB2OoixDFU-BQA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJiMDiQnXMUTRVQ1EXKgC+F330xVErci6-onLyuNVqWTgEwcsA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAMz5XN64AScsyKU=FoB7MhChgpadp=e_YNvbYmkw8EvTbULcdw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1115D927-9D4E-4A8D-9B1F-EBC504428956@acm.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B034DA0@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDptNa6U+XNowC61w7eCQZnnWrXCxP5zBLnCo3WXDHPbQ@mail.gmail.com>

In any democracy, parliamentary rule dictates the formulation of laws in
the midst of an ecosystem in which the Doctrine of Separation of powers
exist where the three arms of government are independent and
constitutionally mandated to act as check and balance each other. The
reality is that in the 192 member countries that make up the United Nations
and the few countries that are not part of the UN, this of course differs,
there are some where rule is by the Executive because of power of the "gun"
and are not democracies etc and we have a complex range of diverse
governance models amongst countries and territories.

It is the norm for democracies, that the only legitimate constitutionally
enshrined exception is when there is a State of Emergency and the President
invokes the Doctrine of Necessity. There are some jurisdictions that have
abused this process to legitimise political rule (I won't get into that but
can discuss offline, lest I be accused of sedition) ;)

For the Doctrine of Necessity to be invoked there has to be proof (visible)
that it is necessary and relevant for the temporary suspension and
derogation of certain rights and privileges. With the increasing cyber
security concerns and the approaches that governments all over the world
are taking (I see this is an indicator in itself of the political climate
in the globe today) as governments all over the world are declaring that it
is a matter of national priority etc, we are witnessing all over the globe
the new battle between the state and the private sector over infrastructure
and when is it legitimate for governments or states to step in etc? Of
course at the end of the day, there is only cause and effect.

(Thinking out loud: would the threat of  "cyber security" justify
intergovernmental control? I would say, no because at the end of the day,
one still needs a multistakeholder approach to handling things like cyber
security threats. What sort of check and balance mechanisms do we need to
ensure that the end user interests and rights are protected?

What is interesting is that when these plays out in the global context, how
does the end user fare? What is the role of civil society in the evolution?
What type of governance models will help preserve an open and free internet?

My 2 cents.

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:20 AM, Lee W McKnight <lmcknigh at syr.edu> wrote:

> Avri,
>
> I am missing how a meeting with a bunch of speeches, including one British
> minister with a pre-existing talking points agenda (William Hague), gets to
> point of multiple governments reaching consensus.
>
> Last week the German and French government didn't even want the British PM
> in the same room with them as they struggled to save the Euro; and now we
> worry (with all due respect) that William Hague will set the global agenda
> for cybersecurity? Doubt it.
>
> Stranger things have happened I admit, but as our on-site reporter hinted,
> odds of a major advance given the structure of the meeting seems  - very
> low.
>
> Lee
> ________________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of
> Avri Doria [avri at acm.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 31, 2011 12:31 PM
> To: IGC
> Subject: RE: [governance] November 1-2 Ministerial Cyber Event  was Re: []
> Cyber Security 2011
>
> On 31 Oct 2011, at 06:31, Deirdre Williams wrote:
>
> > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15355739 UK seeks 'consensus' at
> cyberspace conference
>
>
> and earlier message asked:
>
> > On 30 Oct 2011, at 14:59, Lee W McKnight wrote:
> >
> >> I'm unclear what people are alarmed about;
> >
>
> Me personally? It is that Governments at a ministerial level reach a
> consensus, without proper multistakeholder participation and then work to
> cram it down the collective throats of the world.  I fear that such a
> consensus would be at the expense of the freedoms most of us hold dear, but
> that governments often find troublesome when trying to control their
> populations.  And I feat that in any follow-up, Civil Society would find
> itself fighting against the tide - agreeable to the Business community
> because it spurs the sale of further hardware and software systems, but
> deleterious to the public good.
>
> That is what alarms me.
>
> avri
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/a148f799/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 31 19:33:58 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 12:33:58 +1300
Subject: [governance] CSTD WG going on
In-Reply-To: <CAC0JwGP7+7OrXi3hx=1TSgqfO2infS-Yg3m0jKBp00PtPhU_8A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKhafM7sYyK3gffszhL3G4aARPXh3ttN2LkSPNuig062HQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACpVkK3AUqPidy6aKo2MrFdb65kaiQ-GF3vwhmFD0yfv=nDYaw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAC0JwGP7+7OrXi3hx=1TSgqfO2infS-Yg3m0jKBp00PtPhU_8A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDso0+pDFKWAh0o_mUAtY7ThRJVin3ME4JLUn4McZjWcA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Marilia for the update this is useful. :)

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 12:18 PM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google <
tracyhackshaw at gmail.com> wrote:

> Congrats to all on what looks like some positive outcomes for developing
> economies.
>
> Thanks Izumi and Marilia for the great coverage, updates and advocacy.
>
> Rgds,
>
> Tracy
> On Oct 31, 2011 6:29 PM, "Marilia Maciel" <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> The complete list of "broad agreements" follow below. They are very
>> general and commonplace, but if we think that 90% of the text we tried to
>> write on the last CSTD WG meeting was put inside brackets, it seems
>> positive. If anything, it was a good dynamics to brake the ice. Tomorrow we
>> will go into details on topic A (outcomes). May the force be with us.
>>
>> A - Shaping the outcomes of IGf meetings
>> Broad agreement on the need to improve the outcome documententation of
>> the IGF
>>
>> B - Working modalities including open consultations, MAG and the
>> Secretariat
>> Broad agreement on the need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
>> meetings transparent
>> Broad agreement to have the Secretariat [remain independent and] based in
>> Geneva
>> Broad agreement to strengthen/expand the IGF Secretariat
>> Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
>> groups that internet governance increasingly impacts
>> Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and resources
>> should be strengthened
>> Broad agreement that the MAG needs a clear terms of reference and that
>> the constitution of the MAG should be done in a transparent and documented
>> fashion
>>
>> C - Funding of the IGF
>> Broad agreement that additional voluntary funding should be sought,
>> accepted and encouraged
>> Broad agreement  that funding should be stable, predictable and
>> independent
>>
>> D - Broadening participation
>> Broad agreement that the preparatory process needs to be more visible and
>> for more stakeholders to participate in it
>> Broad agreement on the need to reach out to more stakeholders
>> Broad agreement on the need to enhance remote participation
>> Broad agreement to increase and support participation from all
>> stakeholder groups from developing countries  in IGF and its prep process
>> Broad agreement to increase IG4D topics in the IGF
>> Broad agreement to continue to rotate the location of the IGF annually,
>> to enable different regions to have easy access to IGF
>>
>> L - linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
>> Broad agreement on the need to encourage greater links between national,
>> regional and global IGF
>> Broad agreement on the need to improve the links between the IGF and
>> intergovernmental organizations and international organizations
>>
>>
>> Marília
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:
>>
>>> In the afternoon, we started to examine if there is broad (and
>>> minimum) agreement on each of
>>> the 5 topic categories identified in the morning:
>>>
>>> A)      Shaping the outcomes of IGF meetings
>>> B)      Working modalities including open consultation, MAG and
>>> Secretariat
>>> C)      Funding of the IGF
>>> D)      Participation – broadening
>>> E)      Linking IGF to other related processes/mechanisms/bodies
>>>
>>> And then we reached the point of confusion – it seems very difficult
>>> to reach some specific
>>> agreement or consensus of so many different issues in limited time –
>>> so that Chair suggested
>>> to go into three small working groups and come back to plenary.
>>>
>>> Several governments showed resistance to this proposal and we went back
>>> to
>>> exploring how to go forward as plenary.
>>>
>>> Some governments started to talk about more specifics of item A, and
>>> then Marilia
>>> pointed out that we should go over all 5 elements first without going
>>> into subetantive
>>> discussions, and we can go more specifics later. That was accepted by
>>> the group.
>>>
>>> Then we agreed (tentatively):
>>> “B Working modalities including open consultation MAG, and Secretariat
>>> Broad agreement on need to rotate MAG members regularly, keep MAG
>>> deliberations transparent.
>>> Broad agreement to strengthen the IGF secretariat”
>>> Broad agreement that the MAG should be more representative of all the
>>> groups that Internet Governance increasingly impacts.
>>> Broad agreement that the use of remote participation tools and
>>> resources should be strengthened.
>>> Broad agreement that MAG needs clear Terms of Reference, constitution
>>> of the MAG is done in a transparent and documented fashion.
>>>
>>> C Funding of the IGF
>>> Broad agreement that additional voluntary funding should be sought,
>>> accepted, and encouraged.
>>> Broad agreement that funding is stable and predictable and independent.
>>>
>>> We have had several rounds of interesting exchanges of different views
>>> before reaching these broad agreement.
>>>
>>> Another Coffee break now.
>>>
>>> izumi
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>> FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Center for Technology and Society
>> Getulio Vargas Foundation
>> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111101/8ec3624c/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Sat Oct  1 03:16:34 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 10:16:34 +0300
Subject: [governance] Handover notes
Message-ID: <FC3D77D0-9944-4072-A02F-AB148B4571DA@ciroap.org>

As I step down, here are my notes about what lies ahead for the next coordinator of the IGC and Izumi:

Wolfgang plans to prepare a non-paper which would be a starting point for the development of a civil society statement of principles on Internet governance.  We would form a working group of IGC members and representatives from each of the other NGOs who signed our open letter on the Code of Conduct on Information Security, to produce from this a statement of principles that will go out for broader comment.  The result of that can be tabled at upcoming meetings of the CSTD working group and the G-20 as a draft.  During the course of the year we will gather signatures and present it at other gatherings like EuroDIG, before finally formally launching it at next year's IGF, where it can hopefully feed into multi-stakeholder discussions.
I would encourage the coordinators to maintain the high level dialogue that we established at this year's IGF with the US and EU governments as well as with IBSA governments.  Despite all the opposition to the IBSA proposal at this year's IGF, remember that similar opposition was expressed for years about the IGF producing outputs, yet that now seems inevitable.  Therefore we should not assume that the IBSA proposal won't have legs, and we should engage proactively with its proponents to help mould the proposal into something we would find acceptable, should it go forward.  We are particularly fortunate to have members such as Marilia, Raquel and Veridiana who have contact with the Brazilian government and could act as liaisons.
As I promised, I have spoken informally to a couple of funders about the possibility of the IGC applying for a grant to enable it to incorporate, get ECOSOC accredited, host its own website and mailing list, fund some travel for its coordinators, and maybe take on some part-time administrative help.  Their response was noncommittal though generally encouraging.  So if the IGC is interested, this option is on the table.  Another option discussed at our meeting was for one of the existing NGOs that is aligned with the IGC to take the IGC under its wing as an activity, I suppose in the way that the IETF is an activity of ISOC.  The coordinators may choose to explore this option also.

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111001/8ba95bfe/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111001/8ba95bfe/attachment.bin>

From jeremy at ciroap.org  Sat Oct  1 04:23:08 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 11:23:08 +0300
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
Message-ID: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>

I am pleased to nominate Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala (Pacific) and Raquel Gatto (Latin America) as candidates for the position of IGC coordinator.  Also, nominating themselves (thank you!), are Asif Kabani (Asia) and Sonigitu Ekpe (Africa).

This means that we have four candidates, equal numbers of each gender, from four different Southern regions.  This is enough if we were to call the election now, but we will leave it open for a little longer for others to nominate themselves or to be nominated.

Please, if you would like yourself or someone else to be considered for the position of IGC coordinator in the next election, send your nomination by next Saturday 8 October.  I will begin to prepare the election process after that.

It would also be helpful if each of the candidates could post an election statement to the list, which will also be included on the voting website.  As a guide, you may wish to address one or more of the issues that I posted in my last message to the list titled "Handover notes", but it's up to you.

Thanks to all our candidates and good luck!

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111001/f760f009/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111001/f760f009/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sat Oct  1 15:32:48 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 07:32:48 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiD1z=rLd_-bUTe1c_62HRGPeX-vHLt7-JAce8Voe0TiMQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Jeremy for the nomination. I am in Dubai Airport awaiting the long
journey home. I am glad to accept the nomination and will post a statement
when I reach Fiji.

Warm Regards,
Sala

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> I am pleased to nominate Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala (Pacific) and
> Raquel Gatto (Latin America) as candidates for the position of IGC
> coordinator.  Also, nominating themselves (thank you!), are Asif Kabani
> (Asia) and Sonigitu Ekpe (Africa).
>
> This means that we have four candidates, equal numbers of each gender, from
> four different Southern regions.  This is enough if we were to call the
> election now, but we will leave it open for a little longer for others to
> nominate themselves or to be nominated.
>
> Please, if you would like yourself or someone else to be considered for the
> position of IGC coordinator in the next election, send your nomination by
> next Saturday 8 October.  I will begin to prepare the election process after
> that.
>
> It would also be helpful if each of the candidates could post an election
> statement to the list, which will also be included on the voting website.
>  As a guide, you may wish to address one or more of the issues that I posted
> in my last message to the list titled "Handover notes", but it's up to you.
>
> Thanks to all our candidates and good luck!
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/348caa82/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, 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


From ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com  Sun Oct  2 02:54:26 2011
From: ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com (Narine Khachatryan)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:54:26 +0400
Subject: [governance] Azerbaijan
In-Reply-To: <CDCA6BF9-70AC-406D-A9EF-DE0EDF25629B@ciroap.org>
References: <CDCA6BF9-70AC-406D-A9EF-DE0EDF25629B@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAPVtaunA34UBvBxcm0-u6gex3ecRo6vaZA5aO-Z_xQEfZNf24Q@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

In relation to the next venue for the IGF 2012 in Azerbaijan this is an
 interesting reading:
http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2011/09/30/igf-venue-controversy/

Best regards,
Narine


On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> This evening, Izumi and I raised civil society's concerns about the
> selection of Azerbaijan as the next host country for the IGF, with Thomas
> Steizer, Assistant Secretary-General at UN DESA, and his deputy Vyacheslav
> Cherkasov.  They indicated to us that the human rights concerns had been
> raised with Azerbaijan ahead of the IGF, and that assurances had been made
> that the freedoms of those attending the 2012 IGF would be upheld, not only
> for foreign delegates but also for locals (and specifically including
> Armenians).  The host country agreement contains specific provisions on
> these points.  (I asked for a copy of it, but it seemed that could be a
> problem.)
>
> We also discussed the issue of cost.  Thomas responded that he would take
> this issue up with the prospective hosts and ask them whether low-cost
> accommodation could be provided for IGF delegates.  I will follow up with
> him by email to remind him of his commitment to do this.  (Of course, this
> would do nothing to ease the cost of air travel.)
>
> Given our immediate lack of an alternative host country to propose, there
> seemed to be little we could do to avoid the selection of Azerbaijan as host
> country for 2012.  For 2013, Indonesia has offered to host.
>
> On a sour note, someone had been spreading rumours that civil society had
> been planning a demonstration to protest against the selection of
> Azerbaijan, which I assured Chengetai (though I'm not sure whether he
> believed me) were baseless.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


Narine Khachatryan
Media Education Center
Yerevan, Armenia
http://www.safe.am/
http://www.immasin.am  <http://www.immasin.am>
http://www.mediaeducation.am/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/15d2448d/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, 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


From avri at acm.org  Sun Oct  2 04:20:53 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 10:20:53 +0200
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>

I am happy to see this list of nominees.

I would like to make a request of the nominees. In addition to the point Jeremy made in his note, I would like to see the candidates address issues like the following:

- with the meeting in Azerbaijan, other than worrying about the cost of hotel rooms and the difficulty in finding flight that get there, what should we as Civil Society be doing to make sure that our time in Azerbaijan is as productive as possible in supporting the voices of freedom in that country.  How do we prepare, how do we support, and how we make sure that after we leave there is a watching of the suppression that always comes after a brief open window of freedom that the IGF brings.

- how do we make sure that the voice of civil society is as organized and effective as possible in the approach to the WSIS review meeting in 4 years.  While 4 years may seem a long way away, it is the same amount of time as was consumed by the prepcoms to the original WSIS meetings.  It is now time to start organizing towards those events if we want civil society to have at least as much voice as we had in Tunis.  This includes everything from breadth of organization, to the machinery for producing position papers and the funding to get as many people as possible to all the upcoming meeting.

avri

On 1 Oct 2011, at 10:23, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:

> I am pleased to nominate Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala (Pacific) and Raquel Gatto (Latin America) as candidates for the position of IGC coordinator.  Also, nominating themselves (thank you!), are Asif Kabani (Asia) and Sonigitu Ekpe (Africa).
> 
> This means that we have four candidates, equal numbers of each gender, from four different Southern regions.  This is enough if we were to call the election now, but we will leave it open for a little longer for others to nominate themselves or to be nominated.
> 
> Please, if you would like yourself or someone else to be considered for the position of IGC coordinator in the next election, send your nomination by next Saturday 8 October.  I will begin to prepare the election process after that.
> 
> It would also be helpful if each of the candidates could post an election statement to the list, which will also be included on the voting website.  As a guide, you may wish to address one or more of the issues that I posted in my last message to the list titled "Handover notes", but it's up to you.
> 
> Thanks to all our candidates and good luck!
> 
> -- 
> Dr 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
> 
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
> 
> Read our email confidentiality notice. 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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Sun Oct  2 04:22:11 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 11:22:11 +0300
Subject: [governance] Re: Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiD1z=rLd_-bUTe1c_62HRGPeX-vHLt7-JAce8Voe0TiMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <CAJwbTiD1z=rLd_-bUTe1c_62HRGPeX-vHLt7-JAce8Voe0TiMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AC678C79-01A9-4106-A016-62F32C3080D6@uzh.ch>

I second the nomination, Sala would be great at this…

Bill

On Oct 1, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

> Thanks Jeremy for the nomination. I am in Dubai Airport awaiting the long journey home. I am glad to accept the nomination and will post a statement when I reach Fiji.
> 
> Warm Regards,
> Sala
> 
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 8:23 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> I am pleased to nominate Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala (Pacific) and Raquel Gatto (Latin America) as candidates for the position of IGC coordinator.  Also, nominating themselves (thank you!), are Asif Kabani (Asia) and Sonigitu Ekpe (Africa).
> 
> This means that we have four candidates, equal numbers of each gender, from four different Southern regions.  This is enough if we were to call the election now, but we will leave it open for a little longer for others to nominate themselves or to be nominated.
> 
> Please, if you would like yourself or someone else to be considered for the position of IGC coordinator in the next election, send your nomination by next Saturday 8 October.  I will begin to prepare the election process after that.
> 
> It would also be helpful if each of the candidates could post an election statement to the list, which will also be included on the voting website.  As a guide, you may wish to address one or more of the issues that I posted in my last message to the list titled "Handover notes", but it's up to you.
> 
> Thanks to all our candidates and good luck!
> 
> -- 
> Dr 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
> 
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
> 
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> 
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>  
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/dc5f7da6/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Sun Oct  2 07:33:58 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 19:33:58 +0800
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>
Message-ID: <4E884C26.2060701@ciroap.org>

We have a fifth nominee now, Imran Ahmed Shah.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
Twitter @Consumers_Int <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>


Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/c9f21bb8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2309 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/c9f21bb8/attachment.bin>

From jeanette at wzb.eu  Sun Oct  2 08:01:58 2011
From: jeanette at wzb.eu (Jeanette Hofmann)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 14:01:58 +0200
Subject: [governance] Handover notes
In-Reply-To: <FC3D77D0-9944-4072-A02F-AB148B4571DA@ciroap.org>
References: <FC3D77D0-9944-4072-A02F-AB148B4571DA@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <4E8852B6.5080602@wzb.eu>




>   * I would encourage the coordinators to maintain the high level
>     dialogue that we established at this year's IGF with the US and EU
>     governments as well as with IBSA governments. Despite all the
>     opposition to the IBSA proposal at this year's IGF, remember that
>     similar opposition was expressed for years about the IGF producing
>     outputs, yet that now seems inevitable.


Just for the record. This is Jeremy's opinion. In my view, we are as far 
away from output in the form of official recommendations as a couple of 
years ago. Not even within civil society there is a unanimous view on this.

jeanette



Therefore we should not
>     assume that the IBSA proposal won't have legs, and we should engage
>     proactively with its proponents to help mould the proposal into
>     something we would find acceptable, should it go forward. We are
>     particularly fortunate to have members such as Marilia, Raquel and
>     Veridiana who have contact with the Brazilian government and could
>     act as liaisons.
>   * As I promised, I have spoken informally to a couple of funders about
>     the possibility of the IGC applying for a grant to enable it to
>     incorporate, get ECOSOC accredited, host its own website and mailing
>     list, fund some travel for its coordinators, and maybe take on some
>     part-time administrative help. Their response was noncommittal
>     though generally encouraging. So if the IGC is interested, this
>     option is on the table. Another option discussed at our meeting was
>     for one of the existing NGOs that is aligned with the IGC to take
>     the IGC under its wing as an activity, I suppose in the way that the
>     IETF is an activity of ISOC. The coordinators may choose to explore
>     this option also.
>
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
> and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
> organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
> movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> _www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
> _Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. 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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Sun Oct  2 10:14:51 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 19:44:51 +0530
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>
Message-ID: <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net>

Dear All

I think that nominees should just tell us their own vision, without 
having to follow leads, especially as provided by existing caucus 
coordinators, which to that extent looks authoritative. On the other 
hand, if the agenda of caucus work in the next year, and the following 
ones, is being formed, there is much many of us may have to say, but I 
dont see the present one as such an exercise.

Parminder

On Sunday 02 October 2011 01:50 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> I am happy to see this list of nominees.
>
> I would like to make a request of the nominees. In addition to the point Jeremy made in his note, I would like to see the candidates address issues like the following:
>
> - with the meeting in Azerbaijan, other than worrying about the cost of hotel rooms and the difficulty in finding flight that get there, what should we as Civil Society be doing to make sure that our time in Azerbaijan is as productive as possible in supporting the voices of freedom in that country.  How do we prepare, how do we support, and how we make sure that after we leave there is a watching of the suppression that always comes after a brief open window of freedom that the IGF brings.
>
> - how do we make sure that the voice of civil society is as organized and effective as possible in the approach to the WSIS review meeting in 4 years.  While 4 years may seem a long way away, it is the same amount of time as was consumed by the prepcoms to the original WSIS meetings.  It is now time to start organizing towards those events if we want civil society to have at least as much voice as we had in Tunis.  This includes everything from breadth of organization, to the machinery for producing position papers and the funding to get as many people as possible to all the upcoming meeting.
>
> avri
>
> On 1 Oct 2011, at 10:23, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>
>    
>> I am pleased to nominate Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala (Pacific) and Raquel Gatto (Latin America) as candidates for the position of IGC coordinator.  Also, nominating themselves (thank you!), are Asif Kabani (Asia) and Sonigitu Ekpe (Africa).
>>
>> This means that we have four candidates, equal numbers of each gender, from four different Southern regions.  This is enough if we were to call the election now, but we will leave it open for a little longer for others to nominate themselves or to be nominated.
>>
>> Please, if you would like yourself or someone else to be considered for the position of IGC coordinator in the next election, send your nomination by next Saturday 8 October.  I will begin to prepare the election process after that.
>>
>> It would also be helpful if each of the candidates could post an election statement to the list, which will also be included on the voting website.  As a guide, you may wish to address one or more of the issues that I posted in my last message to the list titled "Handover notes", but it's up to you.
>>
>> Thanks to all our candidates and good luck!
>>
>> -- 
>> Dr 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
>>
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>> www.consumersinternational.org
>> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice. 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, 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
>
>
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/34753dc9/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Sun Oct  2 10:17:28 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2011 19:47:28 +0530
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org> <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <4E887278.4000305@itforchange.net>



On Sunday 02 October 2011 07:44 PM, parminder wrote:
> Dear All
>
> I think that nominees should just tell us their own vision, without 
> having to follow leads, especially as provided by existing caucus 
> coordinators, which to that extent looks authoritative. 

I say this especially since any pre-election statements of those 
standing for elections are kind of election promises, and the newly 
elected coordinator would rightly find somewhat bound by the 
corresponding expectations. parminder

> On the other hand, if the agenda of caucus work in the next year, and 
> the following ones, is being formed, there is much many of us may have 
> to say, but I dont see the present one as such an exercise.
>
> Parminder
>
> On Sunday 02 October 2011 01:50 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> I am happy to see this list of nominees.
>>
>> I would like to make a request of the nominees. In addition to the point Jeremy made in his note, I would like to see the candidates address issues like the following:
>>
>> - with the meeting in Azerbaijan, other than worrying about the cost of hotel rooms and the difficulty in finding flight that get there, what should we as Civil Society be doing to make sure that our time in Azerbaijan is as productive as possible in supporting the voices of freedom in that country.  How do we prepare, how do we support, and how we make sure that after we leave there is a watching of the suppression that always comes after a brief open window of freedom that the IGF brings.
>>
>> - how do we make sure that the voice of civil society is as organized and effective as possible in the approach to the WSIS review meeting in 4 years.  While 4 years may seem a long way away, it is the same amount of time as was consumed by the prepcoms to the original WSIS meetings.  It is now time to start organizing towards those events if we want civil society to have at least as much voice as we had in Tunis.  This includes everything from breadth of organization, to the machinery for producing position papers and the funding to get as many people as possible to all the upcoming meeting.
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 1 Oct 2011, at 10:23, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> I am pleased to nominate Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala (Pacific) and Raquel Gatto (Latin America) as candidates for the position of IGC coordinator.  Also, nominating themselves (thank you!), are Asif Kabani (Asia) and Sonigitu Ekpe (Africa).
>>>
>>> This means that we have four candidates, equal numbers of each gender, from four different Southern regions.  This is enough if we were to call the election now, but we will leave it open for a little longer for others to nominate themselves or to be nominated.
>>>
>>> Please, if you would like yourself or someone else to be considered for the position of IGC coordinator in the next election, send your nomination by next Saturday 8 October.  I will begin to prepare the election process after that.
>>>
>>> It would also be helpful if each of the candidates could post an election statement to the list, which will also be included on the voting website.  As a guide, you may wish to address one or more of the issues that I posted in my last message to the list titled "Handover notes", but it's up to you.
>>>
>>> Thanks to all our candidates and good luck!
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Dr 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
>>>
>>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>>> www.consumersinternational.org
>>> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>>>
>>> Read our email confidentiality notice. 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, 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
>>
>>
>>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/533a8d61/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, 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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Sun Oct  2 11:50:14 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 16:50:14 +0100
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
 <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>
 <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <fiUeKEM2gIiOFAjY@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message <4E8871DB.4080602 at itforchange.net>, at 19:44:51 on Sun, 2 Oct 
2011, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> writes

>I think that nominees should just tell us their own vision

If that's a political vision, then perhaps the co-ordinators are getting 
a little too much like elected presidents.

I'd rather they told us what resources they could call upon to be good 
organisers and consensus builders, and how they envisage delivering the 
commitment of travelling to the various meetings (Geneva-centric 
continues to be a theme) in order to be both the spokesperson and 
researcher for the caucus.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Sun Oct  2 12:07:19 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 19:07:19 +0300
Subject: [governance] Handover notes
In-Reply-To: <4E8852B6.5080602@wzb.eu>
References: <FC3D77D0-9944-4072-A02F-AB148B4571DA@ciroap.org> <4E8852B6.5080602@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxgDQLxceO7Ty+8oBTX1Q=R2NctzvvaYKQEfeQQkAsnR3g@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 2, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Jeanette Hofmann <jeanette at wzb.eu> wrote:

>  Despite all the
>>    opposition to the IBSA proposal at this year's IGF, remember that
>>    similar opposition was expressed for years about the IGF producing
>>    outputs, yet that now seems inevitable.
>>
>
>
> Just for the record. This is Jeremy's opinion. In my view, we are as far
> away from output in the form of official recommendations as a couple of
> years ago. Not even within civil society there is a unanimous view on this.
>

+1

always nice to see you again madame, as well as the rest of the crew who
managed to make it to Nairobi !!


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/ebebae6c/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, 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


From jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr  Sun Oct  2 17:58:05 2011
From: jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr (jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr)
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2011 23:58:05 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [governance] Azerbaijan
In-Reply-To: <CAPVtaunA34UBvBxcm0-u6gex3ecRo6vaZA5aO-Z_xQEfZNf24Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CDCA6BF9-70AC-406D-A9EF-DE0EDF25629B@ciroap.org>
 <CAPVtaunA34UBvBxcm0-u6gex3ecRo6vaZA5aO-Z_xQEfZNf24Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8012943.69014.1317592685856.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e16>

Thanks to Narine for this declaration of Global Voices about the unilateral decision on the venue of the next IGF in Azerbaidjan.

However, there is a big mistake in the text of the GV declaration : Tunis was the venue of the WSIS (and not the IGF), and there isn't any cause to effect relation between the Tunisian revolution -five years later- and the WSIS venue. 

Overall there were social and human right issues and the Tunisian People was fed-up with its dictatorial regime. And succeeded because some of them paid by their lives ! 

Best

Jean-Louis Fullsack
CSDPTT    




> Message du 02/10/11 08:55
> De : "Narine Khachatryan" 
> A : governance at lists.cpsr.org, "Jeremy Malcolm" 
> Copie à : 
> Objet : Re: [governance] Azerbaijan
> 
> Dear All, 
> > In relation to the next venue for the IGF 2012 in Azerbaijan this is an  interesting reading:
http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2011/09/30/igf-venue-controversy/  Best regards, Narine
> 
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Jeremy Malcolm  wrote:
> This evening, Izumi and I raised civil society's concerns about the selection of Azerbaijan as the next host country for the IGF, with Thomas Steizer, Assistant Secretary-General at UN DESA, and his deputy Vyacheslav Cherkasov.  They indicated to us that the human rights concerns had been raised with Azerbaijan ahead of the IGF, and that assurances had been made that the freedoms of those attending the 2012 IGF would be upheld, not only for foreign delegates but also for locals (and specifically including Armenians).  The host country agreement contains specific provisions on these points.  (I asked for a copy of it, but it seemed that could be a problem.) 
> We also discussed the issue of cost.  Thomas responded that he would take this issue up with the prospective hosts and ask them whether low-cost accommodation could be provided for IGF delegates.  I will follow up with him by email to remind him of his commitment to do this.  (Of course, this would do nothing to ease the cost of air travel.)
> 
> Given our immediate lack of an alternative host country to propose, there seemed to be little we could do to avoid the selection of Azerbaijan as host country for 2012.  For 2013, Indonesia has offered to host. 
> On a sour note, someone had been spreading rumours that civil society had been planning a demonstration to protest against the selection of Azerbaijan, which I assured Chengetai (though I'm not sure whether he believed me) were baseless. 
> -- 
> Dr 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
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
> 
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.

> 
> 
  Narine Khachatryan
> Media Education Center
> Yerevan, Armenia
> http://www.safe.am/ http://www.immasin.am  http://www.mediaeducation.am/ 
> 
> 
> 


____________________________________________________________
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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111002/48e80e47/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct  3 01:02:17 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 13:02:17 +0800
Subject: [governance] Moving the mailing list, revisited
Message-ID: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>

Bill Drake has brought to my attention that one of the former CPSR
officers is paying a monthly fee to host our mailing list, whereas
previously I had been told that two years had been paid up in advance so
that there was less urgency to move.

If that is wrong, then it would be nice of us to move the list sooner
rather than later.  I raised the idea of moving it back in January
(http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance/2011-01/msg00110.html), but
the response at that time was indecisive so nothing happened.

At this stage my recommended option is for me to move it to
igf-online.net, which uses the same software, so all of the old archives
will easily be preserved.  Unavoidably, the address of the list would
change from governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at igf-online.net.  It
is also unavoidably dependent on my and/or Consumers International's
ongoing patronage.

However this is a better option than moving the list to the APC server
which hosts our website (assuming that were possible), as the latter
does not run the same mailing list software, so it would be harder to
migrate.  Also, it is still reliant on someone else's ongoing patronage.

Alternatively we can wait and see whether the IGC decides to raise some
funding, in which case it could pay for its own hosting and the website
and mailing list could live together.  This is the best longer term
option, because is allows us to be self-reliant for as long as the
funding is there.

A decision on this needs to be made...

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/5731b887/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/5731b887/attachment.bin>

From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct  3 01:22:35 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 13:22:35 +0800
Subject: [governance] Handover notes
In-Reply-To: <4E8852B6.5080602@wzb.eu>
References: <FC3D77D0-9944-4072-A02F-AB148B4571DA@ciroap.org> <4E8852B6.5080602@wzb.eu>
Message-ID: <4E89469B.2010208@ciroap.org>

On 02/10/11 20:01, Jeanette Hofmann wrote:
>>   * I would encourage the coordinators to maintain the high level
>>     dialogue that we established at this year's IGF with the US and EU
>>     governments as well as with IBSA governments. Despite all the
>>     opposition to the IBSA proposal at this year's IGF, remember that
>>     similar opposition was expressed for years about the IGF producing
>>     outputs, yet that now seems inevitable.
>
> Just for the record. This is Jeremy's opinion. In my view, we are as
> far away from output in the form of official recommendations as a
> couple of years ago. Not even within civil society there is a
> unanimous view on this.

I agree, official recommendations are not likely.  But almost everyone
is now talking about some form of more tangible output, whereas
previously it couldn't even be discussed.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/da2be5c8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/da2be5c8/attachment.bin>

From aizu at anr.org  Mon Oct  3 04:21:19 2011
From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 17:21:19 +0900
Subject: [governance] Moving the mailing list, revisited
In-Reply-To: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com>

Thank you Jeremy for raising or reminding this issue.

Just for the reference, how much in general it would cos to have our
own server, say current level of functions with web and mailing list,
say for five years?

If it is not so significant, we can run a one-time fund-raising campaign
to reach that amount.

izumi


2011/10/3 Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>:
> Bill Drake has brought to my attention that one of the former CPSR officers
> is paying a monthly fee to host our mailing list, whereas previously I had
> been told that two years had been paid up in advance so that there was less
> urgency to move.
>
> If that is wrong, then it would be nice of us to move the list sooner rather
> than later.  I raised the idea of moving it back in January
> (http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/arc/governance/2011-01/msg00110.html), but the
> response at that time was indecisive so nothing happened.
>
> At this stage my recommended option is for me to move it to igf-online.net,
> which uses the same software, so all of the old archives will easily be
> preserved.  Unavoidably, the address of the list would change from
> governance at lists.cpsr.org to governance at igf-online.net.  It is also
> unavoidably dependent on my and/or Consumers International's ongoing
> patronage.
>
> However this is a better option than moving the list to the APC server which
> hosts our website (assuming that were possible), as the latter does not run
> the same mailing list software, so it would be harder to migrate.  Also, it
> is still reliant on someone else's ongoing patronage.
>
> Alternatively we can wait and see whether the IGC decides to raise some
> funding, in which case it could pay for its own hosting and the website and
> mailing list could live together.  This is the best longer term option,
> because is allows us to be self-reliant for as long as the funding is there.
>
> A decision on this needs to be made...
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct  3 04:33:31 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 16:33:31 +0800
Subject: [governance] Moving the mailing list, revisited
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E89735B.2010809@ciroap.org>

On 03/10/11 16:21, Izumi AIZU wrote:
> Thank you Jeremy for raising or reminding this issue.
>
> Just for the reference, how much in general it would cos to have our
> own server, say current level of functions with web and mailing list,
> say for five years?
>
> If it is not so significant, we can run a one-time fund-raising campaign
> to reach that amount.

Sure, it could be as low as $5-10 per month, which for 5 years is just
$300-$600.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/390f1f99/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/390f1f99/attachment.bin>

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Mon Oct  3 06:06:39 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 11:06:39 +0100
Subject: [governance] Moving the mailing list, revisited
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>
 <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ksiwp53vkYiOFAl9@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message 
<CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w at mail.gmail.com>, at 
17:21:19 on Mon, 3 Oct 2011, Izumi AIZU <aizu at anr.org> writes
>we can run a one-time fund-raising campaign

Much simpler, why not run such a campaign to pay CPSR's fees for the 
next two years? Then revisit it in the light of whatever's happening 
then.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Mon Oct  3 15:04:14 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 04:04:14 +0900
Subject: [governance] The Economist at the IGF
In-Reply-To: <ksiwp53vkYiOFAl9@internetpolicyagency.com>
References: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>
 <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <ksiwp53vkYiOFAl9@internetpolicyagency.com>
Message-ID: <p06240841caafb5915ba4@[192.168.10.173]>

Economist coverage of the IGF:

Leader article (important) "Internet governance: In praise of chaos. 
Governments' attempts to control the internet should be resisted" 
<http://www.economist.com/node/21531011>

"A plaything of powerful nations. Internet governance is under 
attack; it may have to mend its ways to survive" 
<http://www.economist.com/node/21530955>

Blog "A pangolin internet"

<http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2011/09/internet-governance>

Record number of participants, on site and remote.  Word is that the 
workshops were of a high standard.

Hope everyone enjoyed Nairobi (except the traffic...)

Best,

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


From mueller at syr.edu  Mon Oct  3 15:29:47 2011
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:29:47 -0400
Subject: [governance] Re: CS letter to UNGA
In-Reply-To: <146A8502-CF0B-475A-915A-70014E4185D5@ciroap.org>
References: <45084da9ff280e3e58ece584e3938bc9@xs4all.nl>
 <1C81086F-BDE2-4055-B982-3FD555C72679@ciroap.org>
 <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C597@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <146A8502-CF0B-475A-915A-70014E4185D5@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FC@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>

Just catching up with this. I understand that it is too late to alter what you did, but it seems odd to me that we would not mention that rather obvious mandate the proposed code of conduct would give to authoritarian states to suppress internet-based expression that they viewed as "destabilizing" their government. That, to me, is far more important than any imputed absence of civil society.

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Jeremy Malcolm
Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2011 8:38 AM
To: "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Re: CS letter to UNGA

On 27/09/2011, at 3:29 PM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:


Hi

here is a very first draft of the letter. Additions,m changeas, enhancements are welcome.

And lets start to invite other NGOs / CS Orgs to join.

Many thanks Wolfgang.  Due to the compressed timescale available to us, Izumi and I have agreed that we won't be holding the usual 48-hour consensus call after the discussion on this draft closes.  Instead we will determine whether there is a rough consensus based on the comments (especially objections) received as we fine-tune this draft text over the next 24 hours.  In the interim, I will reach out to other civil society networks and other stakeholder groups to ascertain whether they will sign on to the final text.  Thanks for your understanding of this deviation from our usual procedures.

--

Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org<http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
Twitter @ConsumersInt<http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>

Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/7a6c387f/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, 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


From mueller at syr.edu  Mon Oct  3 15:36:27 2011
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:36:27 -0400
Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
In-Reply-To: <4E82E79F.1030504@cafonso.ca>
References: <4E82E79F.1030504@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FD@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>

A belated thank you for this response to the IBSA document. Good to know that Nupef refuses to be coopted. 
Is there a web site link to this statement?

Milton L. Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
Internet Governance Project
http://blog.internetgovernance.org 




> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:24 AM
> To: WSIS Internet Governance Caucus
> Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
> 
> Dear people,
> 
> Regarding the recent recommendations (attached as PDF) produced by the
> governments of India, Brazil and South Africa in the context of the IBSA
> initiative (www.ibsa-trilateral.org) and as a consequence of a meeting
> on Internet Governance held by IBSA in Rio de Janeiro on Sept.02, 2011,
>   Instituto Nupef has the following comments:
> 
> The document is presented as the result of an IBSA Multistakeholder
> meeting and all over the document the meeting is presented as the
> subject who puts forward the recommendations. We must clarify that there
> was no such multistakeholder meeting -  Nupef was invited to participate
> in the IBSA seminar as a Brazilian NGO which has views and experiences
> to share on the issues of Internet Governance. Nupef has never expected
> that a document would be produced after the meeting, there was no
> deliberation on concrete outcomes and no process that would lead to a
> production of a final document endorsed by those who were present. In
> our point of view, this subject in the text that presents the proposal -
> "the meeting" - doesn't exist;
> 
> Nupef is against the creation of a new body "located within the UN
> system" dedicated to undertake the roles described in the IBSA
> recommendations;
> 
> Nupef doesn't see how such body could "integrate and oversee the bodies
> responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet,
> including global standards setting;" and why this would be necessary;
> 
> Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
> starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
> in its content but also in the process of its further development,
> including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
> participatory and transparent process;
> 
> Nupef agrees that close collaboration and concrete action is needed in
> the field of Internet Governance and strongly suggests that existing
> dialogue spaces for civil society, government and private sector - such
> as the CGI.br - and existing communications spaces and structures - such
> as e-mail lists and foras that have been hosting this kind of
> collaborative reflection and action for several years - be the space for
> this exchange and deliberation.
> 
> Nairobi, 28-Sept-2011
> Graciela Selaimen
> Carlos A. Afonso (c.a.)
> Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
> www.nupef.org.br
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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


From mueller at syr.edu  Mon Oct  3 15:42:16 2011
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 15:42:16 -0400
Subject: [governance] My blog post on the GAC and the UDRP review
In-Reply-To: <1317402799.4e85f8afab78c@gold.itu.ch>
References: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549373D7@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549373D8@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
 <1317402799.4e85f8afab78c@gold.itu.ch>
Message-ID: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FE@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>

Mr. Karim,
Thanks for responding. As Comoros GAC representative, did you get a copy of the draft GAC statement on the UDRP review? Was it circulated to you asking for your approval? 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
> Behalf Of karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int
> Sent: Friday, September 30, 2011 1:13 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Milton L Mueller
> Subject: Re: [governance] My blog post on the GAC and the UDRP review
> 
> Interesting to know !
> 
> ATTOUMANI MOHAMED Karim,
> Comoros representative on the Governmental Advisory Committee of
> ICANN
> Ingénieur Télécoms en Transmission, Réseaux et Commutation
> Chef du Département Études et Projets,
> Autorité Nationale de Régulation des TIC (ANRTIC) - Union des Comores,
> (+269) 334 37 06 (Mobile Moroni) - ID Skype: attoukarim
> 
> Quoting Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>:
> 
> >
> >  Lifting the Veil on how GAC works...
> >
> http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/9/29/4909356.html
> >
> >  Milton L. Mueller
> >  Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet
> >  Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org
> >
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________
> __
> 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

____________________________________________________________
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


From graciela at nupef.org.br  Mon Oct  3 16:31:16 2011
From: graciela at nupef.org.br (Graciela Selaimen)
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 2011 17:31:16 -0300
Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
In-Reply-To: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FD@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
References: <4E82E79F.1030504@cafonso.ca> <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FD@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <4E8A1B94.4030208@nupef.org.br>

Dear all,

Nupef's statement is published in our website - both in English and 
Portuguese: http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84

best,
Graciela

Em 10/3/11 4:36 PM, Milton L Mueller escreveu:
> A belated thank you for this response to the IBSA document. Good to know that Nupef refuses to be coopted.
> Is there a web site link to this statement?
>
> Milton L. Mueller
> Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> Internet Governance Project
> http://blog.internetgovernance.org
>
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
>> Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:24 AM
>> To: WSIS Internet Governance Caucus
>> Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
>>
>> Dear people,
>>
>> Regarding the recent recommendations (attached as PDF) produced by the
>> governments of India, Brazil and South Africa in the context of the IBSA
>> initiative (www.ibsa-trilateral.org) and as a consequence of a meeting
>> on Internet Governance held by IBSA in Rio de Janeiro on Sept.02, 2011,
>>    Instituto Nupef has the following comments:
>>
>> The document is presented as the result of an IBSA Multistakeholder
>> meeting and all over the document the meeting is presented as the
>> subject who puts forward the recommendations. We must clarify that there
>> was no such multistakeholder meeting -  Nupef was invited to participate
>> in the IBSA seminar as a Brazilian NGO which has views and experiences
>> to share on the issues of Internet Governance. Nupef has never expected
>> that a document would be produced after the meeting, there was no
>> deliberation on concrete outcomes and no process that would lead to a
>> production of a final document endorsed by those who were present. In
>> our point of view, this subject in the text that presents the proposal -
>> "the meeting" - doesn't exist;
>>
>> Nupef is against the creation of a new body "located within the UN
>> system" dedicated to undertake the roles described in the IBSA
>> recommendations;
>>
>> Nupef doesn't see how such body could "integrate and oversee the bodies
>> responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet,
>> including global standards setting;" and why this would be necessary;
>>
>> Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
>> starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
>> in its content but also in the process of its further development,
>> including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
>> participatory and transparent process;
>>
>> Nupef agrees that close collaboration and concrete action is needed in
>> the field of Internet Governance and strongly suggests that existing
>> dialogue spaces for civil society, government and private sector - such
>> as the CGI.br - and existing communications spaces and structures - such
>> as e-mail lists and foras that have been hosting this kind of
>> collaborative reflection and action for several years - be the space for
>> this exchange and deliberation.
>>
>> Nairobi, 28-Sept-2011
>> Graciela Selaimen
>> Carlos A. Afonso (c.a.)
>> Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
>> www.nupef.org.br
>> __________________________________________________________
>> __
>> 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
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From sergioalvesjunior at gmail.com  Mon Oct  3 17:02:59 2011
From: sergioalvesjunior at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=E9rgio_Alves_Jr=2E?=)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:02:59 -0300
Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
In-Reply-To: <4E8A1B94.4030208@nupef.org.br>
References: <4E82E79F.1030504@cafonso.ca>
	<75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FD@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	<4E8A1B94.4030208@nupef.org.br>
Message-ID: <CABhOTkTnvWs4V7kHQkKrcNhriux-qm0SRjUeo2PtVvfK9F4VeA@mail.gmail.com>

Olá, senhoras. Estou um tanto impressionado com este documento.

O Jeferson esteve presente no evento representando a Anatel, mas também
desconhece essas recomendações. Se foi fechado por governo, estejam certas
de que a Agência não participou da formulação.

Vocês já descobriram como ele foi fechado?

Abraços,
Sérgio

2011/10/3 Graciela Selaimen <graciela at nupef.org.br>

> Dear all,
>
> Nupef's statement is published in our website - both in English and
> Portuguese: http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=**node/84<http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84>
>
> best,
> Graciela
>
> Em 10/3/11 4:36 PM, Milton L Mueller escreveu:
>
>  A belated thank you for this response to the IBSA document. Good to know
>> that Nupef refuses to be coopted.
>> Is there a web site link to this statement?
>>
>> Milton L. Mueller
>> Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>> Internet Governance Project
>> http://blog.**internetgovernance.org <http://blog.internetgovernance.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  -----Original Message-----
>>> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.**org<governance at lists.cpsr.org>]
>>> On
>>> Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:24 AM
>>> To: WSIS Internet Governance Caucus
>>> Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
>>>
>>> Dear people,
>>>
>>> Regarding the recent recommendations (attached as PDF) produced by the
>>> governments of India, Brazil and South Africa in the context of the IBSA
>>> initiative (www.ibsa-trilateral.org) and as a consequence of a meeting
>>> on Internet Governance held by IBSA in Rio de Janeiro on Sept.02, 2011,
>>>   Instituto Nupef has the following comments:
>>>
>>> The document is presented as the result of an IBSA Multistakeholder
>>> meeting and all over the document the meeting is presented as the
>>> subject who puts forward the recommendations. We must clarify that there
>>> was no such multistakeholder meeting -  Nupef was invited to participate
>>> in the IBSA seminar as a Brazilian NGO which has views and experiences
>>> to share on the issues of Internet Governance. Nupef has never expected
>>> that a document would be produced after the meeting, there was no
>>> deliberation on concrete outcomes and no process that would lead to a
>>> production of a final document endorsed by those who were present. In
>>> our point of view, this subject in the text that presents the proposal -
>>> "the meeting" - doesn't exist;
>>>
>>> Nupef is against the creation of a new body "located within the UN
>>> system" dedicated to undertake the roles described in the IBSA
>>> recommendations;
>>>
>>> Nupef doesn't see how such body could "integrate and oversee the bodies
>>> responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet,
>>> including global standards setting;" and why this would be necessary;
>>>
>>> Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
>>> starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
>>> in its content but also in the process of its further development,
>>> including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
>>> participatory and transparent process;
>>>
>>> Nupef agrees that close collaboration and concrete action is needed in
>>> the field of Internet Governance and strongly suggests that existing
>>> dialogue spaces for civil society, government and private sector - such
>>> as the CGI.br - and existing communications spaces and structures - such
>>> as e-mail lists and foras that have been hosting this kind of
>>> collaborative reflection and action for several years - be the space for
>>> this exchange and deliberation.
>>>
>>> Nairobi, 28-Sept-2011
>>> Graciela Selaimen
>>> Carlos A. Afonso (c.a.)
>>> Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
>>> www.nupef.org.br
>>> ______________________________**____________________________
>>> __
>>> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<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, visit:
>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/**unsubscribing<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<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, visit:
>    http://www.igcaucus.org/**unsubscribing<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/0a2fd423/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, 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


From vanda at uol.com.br  Mon Oct  3 17:57:04 2011
From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL)
Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:57:04 -0300
Subject: RES: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
In-Reply-To: <CABhOTkTnvWs4V7kHQkKrcNhriux-qm0SRjUeo2PtVvfK9F4VeA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E82E79F.1030504@cafonso.ca>	<75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FD@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>	<4E8A1B94.4030208@nupef.org.br> <CABhOTkTnvWs4V7kHQkKrcNhriux-qm0SRjUeo2PtVvfK9F4VeA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <042e01cc8217$693918b0$3bab4a10$@uol.com.br>

É uma excelente pergunta!

 

Vanda Scartezini

Polo Consultores Associados 

IT Trend

Alameda Santos 1470 – 1407,8

01418-903 São Paulo,SP, Brasil

Tel + 5511 3266.6253

Mob + 55118181.1464

 

De: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Em nome de
Sérgio Alves Jr.
Enviada em: segunda-feira, 3 de outubro de 2011 18:03
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Graciela Selaimen; Marilia Maciel
Assunto: Re: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations

 

Olá, senhoras. Estou um tanto impressionado com este documento.

 

O Jeferson esteve presente no evento representando a Anatel, mas também
desconhece essas recomendações. Se foi fechado por governo, estejam certas
de que a Agência não participou da formulação.

 

Vocês já descobriram como ele foi fechado?

Abraços,

Sérgio

2011/10/3 Graciela Selaimen <graciela at nupef.org.br>

Dear all,

Nupef's statement is published in our website - both in English and
Portuguese: http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84

best,
Graciela

Em 10/3/11 4:36 PM, Milton L Mueller escreveu:

 

A belated thank you for this response to the IBSA document. Good to know
that Nupef refuses to be coopted.
Is there a web site link to this statement?

Milton L. Mueller
Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
Internet Governance Project
http://blog.internetgovernance.org





-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On
Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:24 AM
To: WSIS Internet Governance Caucus
Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations

Dear people,

Regarding the recent recommendations (attached as PDF) produced by the
governments of India, Brazil and South Africa in the context of the IBSA
initiative (www.ibsa-trilateral.org) and as a consequence of a meeting
on Internet Governance held by IBSA in Rio de Janeiro on Sept.02, 2011,
  Instituto Nupef has the following comments:

The document is presented as the result of an IBSA Multistakeholder
meeting and all over the document the meeting is presented as the
subject who puts forward the recommendations. We must clarify that there
was no such multistakeholder meeting -  Nupef was invited to participate
in the IBSA seminar as a Brazilian NGO which has views and experiences
to share on the issues of Internet Governance. Nupef has never expected
that a document would be produced after the meeting, there was no
deliberation on concrete outcomes and no process that would lead to a
production of a final document endorsed by those who were present. In
our point of view, this subject in the text that presents the proposal -
"the meeting" - doesn't exist;

Nupef is against the creation of a new body "located within the UN
system" dedicated to undertake the roles described in the IBSA
recommendations;

Nupef doesn't see how such body could "integrate and oversee the bodies
responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet,
including global standards setting;" and why this would be necessary;

Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
in its content but also in the process of its further development,
including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
participatory and transparent process;

Nupef agrees that close collaboration and concrete action is needed in
the field of Internet Governance and strongly suggests that existing
dialogue spaces for civil society, government and private sector - such
as the CGI.br - and existing communications spaces and structures - such
as e-mail lists and foras that have been hosting this kind of
collaborative reflection and action for several years - be the space for
this exchange and deliberation.

Nairobi, 28-Sept-2011
Graciela Selaimen
Carlos A. Afonso (c.a.)
Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
www.nupef.org.br
__________________________________________________________
__
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

____________________________________________________________
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



____________________________________________________________
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

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/4a2d0c97/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2817 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/4a2d0c97/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1020 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111003/4a2d0c97/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct  3 23:50:49 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 11:50:49 +0800
Subject: [governance] Re: CS letter to UNGA
In-Reply-To: <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FC@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
References: <45084da9ff280e3e58ece584e3938bc9@xs4all.nl> <1C81086F-BDE2-4055-B982-3FD555C72679@ciroap.org> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C597@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <146A8502-CF0B-475A-915A-70014E4185D5@ciroap.org> <75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FC@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <4E8A8299.9000408@ciroap.org>

On 04/10/11 03:29, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Just catching up with this. I understand that it is too late to alter
> what you did, but it seems odd to me that we would not mention that
> rather obvious mandate the proposed code of conduct would give to
> authoritarian states to suppress internet-based expression that they
> viewed as "destabilizing" their government. That, to me, is far more
> important than any imputed absence of civil society.
>

The final text does actually also say that.  Have a look at
http://www.igcaucus.org/infosecurity-code.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111004/3cc276f0/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111004/3cc276f0/attachment.bin>

From nkurunziza1999 at yahoo.fr  Tue Oct  4 05:18:21 2011
From: nkurunziza1999 at yahoo.fr (Jean Paul NKURUNZIZA)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 10:18:21 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [governance] The Economist at the IGF
In-Reply-To: <p06240841caafb5915ba4@[192.168.10.173]>
References: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKids7PZNsYFV+KRvS=BSyv8LE5Qp9DKX05eikeN=sm1=w@mail.gmail.com> <ksiwp53vkYiOFAl9@internetpolicyagency.com> <p06240841caafb5915ba4@[192.168.10.173]>
Message-ID: <1317719901.42826.YahooMailNeo@web25903.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

Thank you Adam, 

The articles are interesting.
I am curious to know what will happen in the IG area in near future.

Regards

 
NKURUNZIZA Jean Paul
Réseau des Télécentres Communautaires du Burundi : Président
www.rtcb.bi


Burundi Youth Training Centre : Secrétaire Général
www.bytc.bi
Tel : +257 79 981459


________________________________
De : Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp>
À : governance at lists.cpsr.org
Envoyé le : Lundi 3 Octobre 2011 21h04
Objet : [governance] The Economist at the IGF

Economist coverage of the IGF:

Leader article (important) "Internet governance: In praise of chaos. Governments' attempts to control the internet should be resisted" <http://www.economist.com/node/21531011>

"A plaything of powerful nations. Internet governance is under attack; it may have to mend its ways to survive" <http://www.economist.com/node/21530955>

Blog "A pangolin internet"

<http://www.economist.com/blogs/baobab/2011/09/internet-governance>

Record number of participants, on site and remote.  Word is that the workshops were of a high standard.

Hope everyone enjoyed Nairobi (except the traffic...)

Best,

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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111004/5cb17fc2/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, 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


From raquelgatto at uol.com.br  Tue Oct  4 14:41:56 2011
From: raquelgatto at uol.com.br (Raquel Gatto)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 15:41:56 -0300
Subject: [governance] Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <fiUeKEM2gIiOFAjY@internetpolicyagency.com>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org> <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net> <fiUeKEM2gIiOFAjY@internetpolicyagency.com>
Message-ID: <4e8b5374843d4_22085b3f83045c@a2-weasel15.tmail>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111004/d8ccfd4a/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Tue Oct  4 18:09:06 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 19:09:06 -0300
Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
In-Reply-To: <CABhOTkTnvWs4V7kHQkKrcNhriux-qm0SRjUeo2PtVvfK9F4VeA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E82E79F.1030504@cafonso.ca>
	<75822E125BCB994F8446858C4B19F0D717549700FD@SUEX07-MBX-04.ad.syr.edu>
	<4E8A1B94.4030208@nupef.org.br>
	<CABhOTkTnvWs4V7kHQkKrcNhriux-qm0SRjUeo2PtVvfK9F4VeA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK1v1jRR4fK1vW_fZGq=1JN=MTr2K5zH_=GFB4_r3r3eVw@mail.gmail.com>

Caros Sérgio e Vanda,

Esse documento foi formulado pelos representantes de governo dos três
países, em uma reuniãoque fizeram após o seminário. Segundo o Rômulo nos
explicou, não é um documento formal do IBAS. É uma exposição da percepção
dos governos sobre alternativas institucionais, e, segundo Brasil e India
afirmaram no IGF, o conteúdo do documento está aberto a críticas e
sugestões.

Um abraço,

Marília


2011/10/3 Sérgio Alves Jr. <sergioalvesjunior at gmail.com>

> Olá, senhoras. Estou um tanto impressionado com este documento.
>
> O Jeferson esteve presente no evento representando a Anatel, mas também
> desconhece essas recomendações. Se foi fechado por governo, estejam certas
> de que a Agência não participou da formulação.
>
> Vocês já descobriram como ele foi fechado?
>
> Abraços,
> Sérgio
>
>
> 2011/10/3 Graciela Selaimen <graciela at nupef.org.br>
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Nupef's statement is published in our website - both in English and
>> Portuguese: http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=**node/84<http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84>
>>
>> best,
>> Graciela
>>
>> Em 10/3/11 4:36 PM, Milton L Mueller escreveu:
>>
>>  A belated thank you for this response to the IBSA document. Good to know
>>> that Nupef refuses to be coopted.
>>> Is there a web site link to this statement?
>>>
>>> Milton L. Mueller
>>> Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>>> Internet Governance Project
>>> http://blog.**internetgovernance.org<http://blog.internetgovernance.org>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.**org<governance at lists.cpsr.org>]
>>>> On
>>>> Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 5:24 AM
>>>> To: WSIS Internet Governance Caucus
>>>> Subject: [governance] Instituto Nupef on IBSA Rio recommendations
>>>>
>>>> Dear people,
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the recent recommendations (attached as PDF) produced by the
>>>> governments of India, Brazil and South Africa in the context of the IBSA
>>>> initiative (www.ibsa-trilateral.org) and as a consequence of a meeting
>>>> on Internet Governance held by IBSA in Rio de Janeiro on Sept.02, 2011,
>>>>   Instituto Nupef has the following comments:
>>>>
>>>> The document is presented as the result of an IBSA Multistakeholder
>>>> meeting and all over the document the meeting is presented as the
>>>> subject who puts forward the recommendations. We must clarify that there
>>>> was no such multistakeholder meeting -  Nupef was invited to participate
>>>> in the IBSA seminar as a Brazilian NGO which has views and experiences
>>>> to share on the issues of Internet Governance. Nupef has never expected
>>>> that a document would be produced after the meeting, there was no
>>>> deliberation on concrete outcomes and no process that would lead to a
>>>> production of a final document endorsed by those who were present. In
>>>> our point of view, this subject in the text that presents the proposal -
>>>> "the meeting" - doesn't exist;
>>>>
>>>> Nupef is against the creation of a new body "located within the UN
>>>> system" dedicated to undertake the roles described in the IBSA
>>>> recommendations;
>>>>
>>>> Nupef doesn't see how such body could "integrate and oversee the bodies
>>>> responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet,
>>>> including global standards setting;" and why this would be necessary;
>>>>
>>>> Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
>>>> starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
>>>> in its content but also in the process of its further development,
>>>> including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
>>>> participatory and transparent process;
>>>>
>>>> Nupef agrees that close collaboration and concrete action is needed in
>>>> the field of Internet Governance and strongly suggests that existing
>>>> dialogue spaces for civil society, government and private sector - such
>>>> as the CGI.br - and existing communications spaces and structures - such
>>>> as e-mail lists and foras that have been hosting this kind of
>>>> collaborative reflection and action for several years - be the space for
>>>> this exchange and deliberation.
>>>>
>>>> Nairobi, 28-Sept-2011
>>>> Graciela Selaimen
>>>> Carlos A. Afonso (c.a.)
>>>> Instituto Nupef, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
>>>> www.nupef.org.br
>>>> ______________________________**____________________________
>>>> __
>>>> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>>>>
>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<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, visit:
>>>      http://www.igcaucus.org/**unsubscribing<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>>>
>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<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, visit:
>>    http://www.igcaucus.org/**unsubscribing<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111004/1f05c721/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, 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


From jefsey at jefsey.com  Tue Oct  4 22:12:21 2011
From: jefsey at jefsey.com (JFC Morfin)
Date: Wed, 05 Oct 2011 04:12:21 +0200
Subject: [governance] CAC - combating against comptuter assisted crime
In-Reply-To: <4e8b5374843d4_22085b3f83045c@a2-weasel15.tmail>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
 <487DE54D-A98F-49EB-8B5F-94B26BC6C75B@acm.org>
 <4E8871DB.4080602@itforchange.net>
 <fiUeKEM2gIiOFAjY@internetpolicyagency.com>
 <4e8b5374843d4_22085b3f83045c@a2-weasel15.tmail>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20111005024038.06a6d3c0@jefsey.com>


Computers and the Internet permit computer assisted crimes, felonies, 
thefts, frauds, etc. which are more difficult to spot or to oppose 
because a computer was involved. From spam to hidden bank charges (by 
the computer) or taxes or additional costs, or crazy automated 
relational processes, etc. 
http://legal.practitioner.com/computer-crime/computercrime_2_3_1.htm

Civil society should consider starting a worldwide campaign for 
national laws to consider computer assistance as an aggravating 
circumstance when committing an offence. This simply makes sense 
because when someone is computer assisted it is as if they had an 
accomplice and also means at least some form of premeditation and 
some form of remote physical impunity. If Majors were able to protect 
and create new Internet rights, why can't the people protect and 
create new Computer/Internet related rights in that same, very simple 
manner. Considering computer assistance as a possibly aggravating 
circumstance would most probably help better qualifying facts and 
educate people in how to better defend themselves in our computer age.

A generalized computer assisted crime is certainly the way any 
organization of some size, and that deals with people diversity, 
automates its relations with people as if they were computers (it is 
simpler, cheaper, and lawyerless) and carries it to its sole benefit. 
This is why I am sure every one of us has met a circumstance when 
he/she has accepted to pay something undue because the demand came 
from a computer assisted organization, and disputing it would have 
been more of a pain than paying it.

jfc

____________________________________________________________
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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Wed Oct  5 06:05:58 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 11:05:58 +0100
Subject: [governance] Election Statement
Message-ID: <1317809158975673000@crossriverstate.gov.ng>

Fellows and friends,


Understanding the complexmultidisciplinary nature and regime involving many issues, actors, mechanisms,procedures and instruments; I present myself for service in the next electionfor the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC)- Coordinator.


“Do we have to Universalize InternetGovernance development at the expense of the richness of diversity?”


‘How can we promote universalunderstanding, taking into account what Internet Governance development meansto each community without promoting the hegemony of our own perception ofInternet Governance development?’


Free Internet will lead tomore transparency and political accountability which I greatly preserve,keeping in mind the borderless nature of the Internet.


My vision is to utilizeand harmonise resources, human and material resources for the continuous developmentof the Internet for the benefit of the generality of man and our environment,to the glory of the Almighty.


To the Internet GovernanceCaucus, I pledge my love and toil and with abiding faith in Almighty Creator,aspire to develop a well-articulated, determined, coordinated and disciplinedprogram to succeed. The like of which has not to date been obtained in IGC.


With a focus on Top Downservices from our team to help up-lift the poor that act in Bottom Up activities;with the involvement of a variety of stakeholders who differ in many aspects,including international legal capacity with interest in Internet Governanceissues, and available expertise to:
 * ·       Promote the growth of mutual trust andrespect for all
 * ·       Reach out with governments andinter-governmental agencies through the enhancement of Civil Society Voice andnon-state actors in the Internet Governance Forum process.
 * ·       To be part of a team that will lay out anapproach that unifies our engagement in ushering a new era of InternationalCooperation.
 * ·       Together, we can work to build a future forthe IGC that is open, interoperable, secure and reliable.
 * ·    Creating enabling environment for increasecollaborations among the multi-stakeholders to contribute to the discussion andimplementation of outcomes with governments which will truly promote thevertical and horizontal management of the Internet.


The Internet continues toexpand at a rapid rate, not only in terms of the number of users but also interms of the services that it offers. And I believe we all want the IGCtransformation with vast potentials resulting in good relationship withBusiness and Technical communities.


To achieve the above, Ipropose to put in place the following:
a.     1.  Strategyand contact Committee 
b.     2. EconomicCommittee
c.      3.  FinanceCommittee


With the following termsof reference:
 * ·             Strategy and Contact Committee
o  Identify specific goals and objectives
o  Develop programmes for achieving goals
o  Establish contacts and links withgovernments, private sector, Civil Societies, non-state actors andintergovernmental agencies
o  Develop strategies for politicalempowerment
o  Lobbying
o  Propaganda
o  Press relations
o  Protocol
 * ·           Economic Committee
o  Develop economic blueprint for the InternetGovernance Caucus
o  Analyse investment and research opportunities
o  Monitor implementation of projects
 * ·       Finance Committee
o  Identify ways of enhancing financialpositions of members
o  Prepare revenue projections
o  Identify and harness ways and means ofgenerating funds
o  Identify specific source of funding forspecific projects
o  Treasury


Finally, with variablegeometric approach, we will bridge the principal challenge for many governmentsto develop a strategy to gather and effectively coordinate support fromnon-state actors, such as universities, private companies, and non-governmentalorganizations that have the necessary expertise to deal with InternetGovernance Issues.


Yourvotes will make a great difference.


Thank you.


SonigituEkpe Aji 
(aka)Sea

-- 
 Sonigitu Ekpe Project Support Officer[Agriculturist] Cross River Farm Credit Scheme Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources 3 Barracks Road P.M.B. 1119 Calabar - Cross River State, Nigeria.  Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179  "LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving"
__________________________________________________________________________
The information contained in this communication is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in reliance of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Kindly destroy this message and notify the sender by replying the email in such instances. We do not accept responsibility for any changes made to this message after it was originally sent and any views, opinions, conclusions or other information in this message which do not relate to the business of this firm or are not authorized by us.The Cross River State Government is not liable neither for the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this communication nor any delay in its receipt.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/0ea6a7da/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, 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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 10:48:27 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 07:48:27 -0700
Subject: [governance] FW: Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
Message-ID: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>

I've been asked by the organizers of this to see if the IGC is willing to
sign on to this... The closing date would be late Thursday/early Friday
Europe time.
 
I don't believe that they are on this list so comments might be copied both
to Irene and to the list.
 
I'm not sure if there is a formal process for approval/non-approval but
perhaps the co-coordinators could intervene here.
 
Tks,
 
M
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Irene Prevedello [mailto:irene.prevedello at agoradigitale.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 2:09 AM
To: gurstein at gmail.com
Cc: Luca Nicotra
Subject: Final version open letter e-G20


Dear Mike,
I attach the final version of the open letter addressed to the organizers of
the e-G20!
We would like to turn it into public by friday.
Do you confirm Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus's interest in being
involved in this initiative and put the signature on the letter?

Best,
Irene
Team Agorà Digitale 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/2bccc495/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Openletter.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 83479 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/2bccc495/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 10:48:27 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 07:48:27 -0700
Subject: [governance] FW: [P2P-F] Wikipedia threatens to self-suspend in
 Italy due to proposed new law
Message-ID: <0F870664C1694557A7893171F56251AD@acer6e40e97492>


-----Original Message-----
From: p2p-foundation-bounces at lists.ourproject.org
[mailto:p2p-foundation-bounces at lists.ourproject.org] On Behalf Of Bertram
Maria niessen
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 2:05 AM
To: P2P Foundation mailing list
Subject: [P2P-F] Wikipedia self-suspending

Wikipedia self-suspending in Italy due to Berlusconi Government's Law
Proposal against free speech on the Web
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011/en
_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation

____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Wed Oct  5 11:10:40 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 23:10:40 +0800
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
Message-ID: <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>

In principle I think we should lend support, but I'm not sure about the wording of the letter.  I understand that e-G20 is not an official name of the meeting, it is just a meeting of the G20 summit at which Internet will be discussed.  If the letter could be revised to reflect the position better, then we could probably do a rapid consensus call on this list, and if that succeeded then to include our name.

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/cbe8a7ba/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/cbe8a7ba/attachment.bin>

From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Wed Oct  5 11:36:36 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 16:36:36 +0100
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
 <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <7KZXQPSEmHjOFAda@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8 at ciroap.org>, at 
23:10:40 on Wed, 5 Oct 2011, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> writes

>  I understand that e-G20 is not an official name of the meeting, it is 
>just a meeting of the G20 summit at which Internet will be discussed.

The G20 summit isn't until November 3-4, so it's presumably one of a 
series of pre-meetings, and not a particularly well advertised one. Does 
anyone have url for it?
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From avri at acm.org  Wed Oct  5 11:45:52 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 11:45:52 -0400
Subject: [governance] Moving the mailing list, revisited
In-Reply-To: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8941D9.6060100@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <5A0EC57B-0F67-41B4-AA18-B31C236F42BB@acm.org>


On 3 Oct 2011, at 01:02, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:

> Alternatively we can wait and see whether the IGC decides to raise some funding, in which case it could pay for its own hosting and the website and mailing list could live together.  This is the best longer term option, because is allows us to be self-reliant for as long as the funding is there.


as the 'patron' for the registration for the igcaucus.org name, i am in favor of this option.
i would be willing to contribute and to help in the system admin of such a site.

avri

____________________________________________________________
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


From iza at anr.org  Wed Oct  5 12:39:49 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 01:39:49 +0900
Subject: [governance] FW: Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
	<642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>

Jeremy and all,
given the limited info and also time, could we start a consensus call with
some conditional
element?
I mean we ask general support for joining this open letter within IGC as
consensus call and also ask the organizer to modify the wording that
reflects the
latest and accurate info?

and maybe the details can be left to us, co-coordinators if IGC also agrees.

Izumi


2011年10月6日木曜日 Jeremy Malcolm jeremy at ciroap.org:
> In principle I think we should lend support, but I'm not sure about the
wording of the letter.  I understand that e-G20 is not an official name of
the meeting, it is just a meeting of the G20 summit at which Internet will
be discussed.  If the letter could be revised to reflect the position
better, then we could probably do a rapid consensus call on this list, and
if that succeeded then to include our name.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice <
http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't print
this email unless necessary.
>

-- 
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<
          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
                              www.anr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/c2f44fd4/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, 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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 13:17:22 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:17:22 -0700
Subject: [governance] FW: Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9CF96D9DF6FE4B908692003525040E93@acer6e40e97492>

That's sounds like a reasonable approach Izumi/Jeremy

M

 -----Original Message-----
From: izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi
AIZU
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 9:40 AM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeremy Malcolm
Cc: michael gurstein
Subject: Re: [governance] FW: Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion

Jeremy and all,
given the limited info and also time, could we start a consensus call with
some conditional
element?
I mean we ask general support for joining this open letter within IGC as
consensus call and also ask the organizer to modify the wording that
reflects the
latest and accurate info?

and maybe the details can be left to us, co-coordinators if IGC also agrees.

Izumi


2011年10月6日木曜日 Jeremy Malcolm jeremy at ciroap.org:
> In principle I think we should lend support, but I'm not sure about the
wording of the letter.  I understand that e-G20 is not an official name of
the meeting, it is just a meeting of the G20 summit at which Internet will
be discussed.  If the letter could be revised to reflect the position
better, then we could probably do a rapid consensus call on this list, and
if that succeeded then to include our name.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't print
this email unless necessary.
>

--
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<
          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
                              www.anr.org


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/4bb17196/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, 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


From nyangkweagien at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 11:19:28 2011
From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 17:19:28 +0200
Subject: [governance] FW: [P2P-F] Wikipedia threatens to self-suspend in
 Italy due to proposed new law
In-Reply-To: <0F870664C1694557A7893171F56251AD@acer6e40e97492>
References: <0F870664C1694557A7893171F56251AD@acer6e40e97492>
Message-ID: <CAM29qGZDqaSVFs6v+M=YpVUO--2kX+S2BXp8HB8NaRjDtPrQaw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all

That is very horrible to hear indeed.
Can Italy now claim to be a democracy?

Aaron

On 10/5/11, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2p-foundation-bounces at lists.ourproject.org
> [mailto:p2p-foundation-bounces at lists.ourproject.org] On Behalf Of Bertram
> Maria niessen
> Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 2:05 AM
> To: P2P Foundation mailing list
> Subject: [P2P-F] Wikipedia self-suspending
>
> Wikipedia self-suspending in Italy due to Berlusconi Government's Law
> Proposal against free speech on the Web
> http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Comunicato_4_ottobre_2011/en
> _______________________________________________
> P2P Foundation - Mailing list
> http://www.p2pfoundation.net
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist-OutCome Mapper
Special Assistant to Tha President
ASAFE
Telephone:237 33 01 30 13
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 15:57:25 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 16:57:25 -0300
Subject: [governance] Techdirt: Brazil drafts an anti-ACTA civil rights
 framework
Message-ID: <CACpVkK2USm1wKZofAb7=Frj4czhX2oATdk-9fxXbjW5Z6x4O0w@mail.gmail.com>

Brazil Drafts An 'Anti-ACTA': A Civil Rights-Based Framework For The
Internetfrom the *who's-leader-of-the-*free*-world-now?* dept

One of the striking features of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is
that it is mainly being signed by Western/“developed” countries – with a few
token players from other parts of the world to provide a fig-leaf of nominal
inclusiveness<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110927/10504716112/us-eu-canada-japan-australia-others-to-sign-acta-this-weekend-despite-legal-concerns.shtml>.
That's no accident: ACTA is the last-gasp attempt of the US and the EU to
preserve their intellectual monopolies – copyright and patents, particularly
drug patents – in a world where both are increasingly questioned.

Much of the challenge to the old order is coming from the BRICS group of
emerging countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – none of
which has been involved in ACTA. Of those, the one in the vanguard of
adopting innovative approaches to making knowledge widely accessible in the
Internet age is Brazil.

For example, the federal government has actively supported open source
software<http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/08/should-we-adopt-the-brazilian-model-of-public-software/index.htm>
by
creating a Public Software Portal. The country has also been at the
forefront of open content use <http://www.openbusiness.cc/brazil/>: just
this week, the city of São Paulo specified that all educational materials
produced for it must be released under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA
license<http://rea.net.br/2011/10/03/decreto-sobre-rea-em-vigor-em-sao-paulo/>
.

It's true that there have also been some mixed signals recently, notably the
re-surfacing of the punitive “cybercrime
bill”<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110826/00352915694/brazil-looks-to-criminalize-ripping-cd.shtml>,
which Techdirt reported on a couple of months ago. But here's some positive
news coming out of the country, in the shape of a draft of a bill for a
civil rights-based framework for the
Internet<http://infojustice.org/archives/5684>
:

**
*

The draft bill proposition for a Civil Right’s Based Framework for Internet
in Brazil has just reached Congress. The English translation of this version
is available here<http://www.a2kbrasil.org.br/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Marco-Civil-Ingle%CC%82s-pm.pdf>
.

*

**
*

It is the result of an initiative from the Brazilian Ministry of Justice, in
partnership with the Center for Technology and Society of the Getulio Vargas
Foundation (CTS/FGV), to develop a collaborative online/offline consultation
process in which all the actors from Brazilian society could identify
together the rights and responsibilities that should guide the use of the
Internet in Brazil. The process, which resulted in a Bill of Law, is an
example of the importance and the great potential of multistakeholder
involvement on policy-making.

*

**
*

NGOs, universities, internet service providers (collectively though
associations, as well as individually), business companies, law firms, law
enforcement agencies, individuals, Brazilian Embassies from all over the
world, and many other participants have joined the online public hearing.
The participation of several stakeholder groups has promoted the diversity
of opinions and the availability of high quality information and expert
advise, which have helped the government to draft a balanced bill. The
openness and transparency of the process, entirely conducted online, in the
public eye, has improved the legitimacy of the bill. Marco Civil was
introduced in Congress with the political weight and the legitimacy that the
Bill would be expected to have after a complex multistakeholder discussion.

*

Among its fundamental principles:

**
*

I – safeguarding freedom of speech, communication, and manifestation of
thought, in the terms of the Constitution;

*

**
*

II – the protection of privacy;

*

**
*

III – the protection of personal data, in accordance to the law;

*

**
*

IV – the preservation and safeguarding of net neutrality, in compliance with
further regulation;

*

And this is *real* net neutrality, not the compromised US
kind<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101220/22311012351/as-expected-fcc-approving-net-neutrality-rules-that-att-wants.shtml>
:

**
*

Article 9. The party responsible for the transmission, switching or routing
of data has the obligation of granting equal treatment to every data
package, with no distinction by content, origin and destination, service,
terminal or application; any traffic discrimination or degradation that does
not arise out of the technical requirements necessary to the adequate
provision of services is prohibited, in accordance to further regulation.

*

It also comes out strongly in favor of guaranteeing access to the Internet,
respect for personal privacy online, and against any kind of “three strikes”
laws cutting off users for alleged copyright infringement:

**
*

Article 7. Access to the Internet is essential for the exercise of
citizenship, and the following rights are secured to its users:

*

**
*

I – the non-violation and secrecy of communications on the Internet, except
under judicial order, in the hypotheses and form established by law, for
criminal investigations or the gathering of evidence for criminal
procedures;

*

**
*

II – the non suspension of Internet connections, except for debts directly
related to their use;

*

It has plenty to say on the vexed issue of keeping users' access logs,
including:

**
*

Article 10. The storage and disclosure of the connection logs and Internet
application access logs regulated by this law must preserve intimacy,
private life, the reputation and image of the parties directly or indirectly
involved.

*

**
*

§1 The Internet service provider responsible for the storage of logs will
only be constrained to disclose the information that allows the
identification of the user under a judicial order

*

Nor is ISP liability overlooked:

**
*

Article 14. Internet connection providers shall not be responsible for
damage arising from content generated by third parties.

*

**
*

Article 15. Except otherwise established by law, Internet application
providers can only be responsible for the damages caused by content
generated by third parties if, after receiving a specific judicial order,
they do not take action to, in the context of their services and under the
established time frame, make unavailable the infringing content.

*

And the crucial issue of judicial requests for logs is also spelled out in
detail:

**
*

Article 17. Interested parties may, for the purpose of gathering evidence in
civil and criminal proceedings, of either accidental or autonomous nature,
request a judge to order the party responsible for storing Internet service
access logs, or connection logs, to disclose these logs.

*

**
*

Sole Paragraph. Without prejudice of other legal requirements, the
application shall contain, under penalty of not being admissible:

*

**
*

I – solid evidence of the occurrence of an illegal act;

*

**
*

II – a motivated justification for the utility of accessing the requested
logs, for the purposes of investigation or the gathering of evidence;

*

**
*

III - the period that the logs refer to.

*

**
*

Article 18. It is the obligation of judges to take the measures necessary to
guarantee the secrecy of the information received, and the preservation of
the intimacy, private life, honor and image of Internet users. Judges are
capable, for that purpose, to constitute the information as secret,
including with respect to requests for the storage of logs.

*

All-in-all, it's a remarkable document, forming in effect an "anti-ACTA"
that guarantees many of the protections for Internet users that ACTA seeks
to eradicate, and forbids repressive measures that ACTA aims to introduce.

However, two big questions hang over the draft. First, whether it will be
passed by the Brazilian Congress in its present form (or at all), and,
second, how it can be squared with the harsh penalties proposed in the
“cybercrime” bill mentioned above if that too comes into force. But whatever
happens, Brazil has already shown leadership by drafting a bill that dares
to question and oppose the copyright maximalist orthodoxies underlying ACTA
– something signally lacking in other countries.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter <http://twitter.com/glynmoody> or
identi.ca<http://identi.ca/glynmoody>,
and on Google+ <https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533>

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111005/f4a1ce3b/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 18:25:48 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 10:25:48 +1200
Subject: [governance] Techdirt: Brazil drafts an anti-ACTA civil rights
 framework
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK2USm1wKZofAb7=Frj4czhX2oATdk-9fxXbjW5Z6x4O0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK2USm1wKZofAb7=Frj4czhX2oATdk-9fxXbjW5Z6x4O0w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAmmTqZfh_Hah=V8MzfMcVuOGGNwb2kN5+5ZjONokgcwQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Marilia.

This is very interesting and was also the subject of much debate and
discussions on the Asia Pacific Regional IGF. The transcripts and
presentation are available via http://2011.rigf.asia/program.php see 16th
June, 2011 from 1400 and this was how the Plenary was described:

*Intellectual Property: ACTA **and Other Controversies** *
The Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement would be a treaty to put in place new
and higher international standards on intellectual property enforcement.
Apart from its obvious TRIPS-Plus nature and forceful use of ISPs as private
police, ACTA reveals a couple of critically important aspects that deserve
careful scrutiny from the perspective of Internet Governance. ACTA’s
plurilateral and closed negotiation process directly goes against the
multi-stakeholder and open and transparent participation principles
developed for Internet Governance. ACTA’s narrow focus on intellectual
property rights ignores human rights concerns, especially free speech and
access to the Internet, that are essential in the information society. ACTA
demonstrate the temptation to shift from the existing multilateral WIPO-WTO
regime to a more restricted and opaque system to enforce the private
exclusive rights on the global information network. In addition, other
domestic (such as US Bill “Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits
Act (COICA)”) or private (such as ICANN’s trademark measures in new gTLD
process) enforcement measures for intellectual property will exert
significant global impact. The session intends to have a vivid discussion on
all these interesting issues in the most populous and economic-booming
region of the world.

   - Mary Wong <http://2011.rigf.asia/bio/Mary%20Wong.pdf> (University of
   New Hampshire)
   - Goh Seow Hiong <http://2011.rigf.asia/bio/Cisco_SH_Goh_BIO.pdf>
    (CISCO)
   - Jordan Carter <http://2011.rigf.asia/bio/Jordan%20Carter.pdf>
    (InternetNZ)
   - Siew Kum Hong <http://2011.rigf.asia/bio/Siew%20Kum%20Hong.pdf> (Yahoo!
   Southeast Asia)
   - Lim Yee Fen <http://2011.rigf.asia/bio/Lim%20Yee%20Fen.pdf> (NTU)
   - William J. Drake <http://2011.rigf.asia/bio/William%20J%20Drake.pdf> (IPMZ
   University of Zurich)


On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:

>
> Brazil Drafts An 'Anti-ACTA': A Civil Rights-Based Framework For The
> Internet from the *who's-leader-of-the-*free*-world-now?* dept
>
> One of the striking features of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement is
> that it is mainly being signed by Western/“developed” countries – with a
> few token players from other parts of the world to provide a fig-leaf of
> nominal inclusiveness<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110927/10504716112/us-eu-canada-japan-australia-others-to-sign-acta-this-weekend-despite-legal-concerns.shtml>.
> That's no accident: ACTA is the last-gasp attempt of the US and the EU to
> preserve their intellectual monopolies – copyright and patents, particularly
> drug patents – in a world where both are increasingly questioned.
>
> Much of the challenge to the old order is coming from the BRICS group of
> emerging countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – none of
> which has been involved in ACTA. Of those, the one in the vanguard of
> adopting innovative approaches to making knowledge widely accessible in the
> Internet age is Brazil.
>
> For example, the federal government has actively supported open source
> software<http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2011/08/should-we-adopt-the-brazilian-model-of-public-software/index.htm> by
> creating a Public Software Portal. The country has also been at the
> forefront of open content use <http://www.openbusiness.cc/brazil/>: just
> this week, the city of São Paulo specified that all educational materials
> produced for it must be released under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA
> license<http://rea.net.br/2011/10/03/decreto-sobre-rea-em-vigor-em-sao-paulo/>
> .
>
> It's true that there have also been some mixed signals recently, notably the
> re-surfacing of the punitive “cybercrime bill”<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110826/00352915694/brazil-looks-to-criminalize-ripping-cd.shtml>,
> which Techdirt reported on a couple of months ago. But here's some positive
> news coming out of the country, in the shape of a draft of a bill for a
> civil rights-based framework for the Internet<http://infojustice.org/archives/5684>
> :
>
> **
> *
>
> The draft bill proposition for a Civil Right’s Based Framework for Internet
> in Brazil has just reached Congress. The English translation of this version
> is available here<http://www.a2kbrasil.org.br/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Marco-Civil-Ingle%CC%82s-pm.pdf>
> .
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> It is the result of an initiative from the Brazilian Ministry of Justice,
> in partnership with the Center for Technology and Society of the Getulio
> Vargas Foundation (CTS/FGV), to develop a collaborative online/offline
> consultation process in which all the actors from Brazilian society could
> identify together the rights and responsibilities that should guide the use
> of the Internet in Brazil. The process, which resulted in a Bill of Law, is
> an example of the importance and the great potential of multistakeholder
> involvement on policy-making.
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> NGOs, universities, internet service providers (collectively though
> associations, as well as individually), business companies, law firms, law
> enforcement agencies, individuals, Brazilian Embassies from all over the
> world, and many other participants have joined the online public hearing.
> The participation of several stakeholder groups has promoted the diversity
> of opinions and the availability of high quality information and expert
> advise, which have helped the government to draft a balanced bill. The
> openness and transparency of the process, entirely conducted online, in the
> public eye, has improved the legitimacy of the bill. Marco Civil was
> introduced in Congress with the political weight and the legitimacy that the
> Bill would be expected to have after a complex multistakeholder discussion.
>
> *
>
> Among its fundamental principles:
>
> **
> *
>
> I – safeguarding freedom of speech, communication, and manifestation of
> thought, in the terms of the Constitution;
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> II – the protection of privacy;
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> III – the protection of personal data, in accordance to the law;
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> IV – the preservation and safeguarding of net neutrality, in compliance
> with further regulation;
>
> *
>
> And this is *real* net neutrality, not the compromised US kind<http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101220/22311012351/as-expected-fcc-approving-net-neutrality-rules-that-att-wants.shtml>
> :
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 9. The party responsible for the transmission, switching or routing
> of data has the obligation of granting equal treatment to every data
> package, with no distinction by content, origin and destination, service,
> terminal or application; any traffic discrimination or degradation that does
> not arise out of the technical requirements necessary to the adequate
> provision of services is prohibited, in accordance to further regulation.
>
> *
>
> It also comes out strongly in favor of guaranteeing access to the Internet,
> respect for personal privacy online, and against any kind of “three strikes”
> laws cutting off users for alleged copyright infringement:
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 7. Access to the Internet is essential for the exercise of
> citizenship, and the following rights are secured to its users:
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> I – the non-violation and secrecy of communications on the Internet, except
> under judicial order, in the hypotheses and form established by law, for
> criminal investigations or the gathering of evidence for criminal
> procedures;
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> II – the non suspension of Internet connections, except for debts directly
> related to their use;
>
> *
>
> It has plenty to say on the vexed issue of keeping users' access logs,
> including:
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 10. The storage and disclosure of the connection logs and Internet
> application access logs regulated by this law must preserve intimacy,
> private life, the reputation and image of the parties directly or indirectly
> involved.
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> §1 The Internet service provider responsible for the storage of logs will
> only be constrained to disclose the information that allows the
> identification of the user under a judicial order
>
> *
>
> Nor is ISP liability overlooked:
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 14. Internet connection providers shall not be responsible for
> damage arising from content generated by third parties.
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 15. Except otherwise established by law, Internet application
> providers can only be responsible for the damages caused by content
> generated by third parties if, after receiving a specific judicial order,
> they do not take action to, in the context of their services and under the
> established time frame, make unavailable the infringing content.
>
> *
>
> And the crucial issue of judicial requests for logs is also spelled out in
> detail:
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 17. Interested parties may, for the purpose of gathering evidence
> in civil and criminal proceedings, of either accidental or autonomous
> nature, request a judge to order the party responsible for storing Internet
> service access logs, or connection logs, to disclose these logs.
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> Sole Paragraph. Without prejudice of other legal requirements, the
> application shall contain, under penalty of not being admissible:
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> I – solid evidence of the occurrence of an illegal act;
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> II – a motivated justification for the utility of accessing the requested
> logs, for the purposes of investigation or the gathering of evidence;
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> III - the period that the logs refer to.
>
> *
>
> **
> *
>
> Article 18. It is the obligation of judges to take the measures necessary
> to guarantee the secrecy of the information received, and the preservation
> of the intimacy, private life, honor and image of Internet users. Judges are
> capable, for that purpose, to constitute the information as secret,
> including with respect to requests for the storage of logs.
>
> *
>
> All-in-all, it's a remarkable document, forming in effect an "anti-ACTA"
> that guarantees many of the protections for Internet users that ACTA seeks
> to eradicate, and forbids repressive measures that ACTA aims to introduce.
>
> However, two big questions hang over the draft. First, whether it will be
> passed by the Brazilian Congress in its present form (or at all), and,
> second, how it can be squared with the harsh penalties proposed in the
> “cybercrime” bill mentioned above if that too comes into force. But whatever
> happens, Brazil has already shown leadership by drafting a bill that dares
> to question and oppose the copyright maximalist orthodoxies underlying ACTA
> – something signally lacking in other countries.
>
> Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter <http://twitter.com/glynmoody> or
> identi.ca <http://identi.ca/glynmoody>, and on Google+<https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/af22e623/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Wed Oct  5 21:02:11 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 09:02:11 +0800
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492> <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>

On 06/10/2011, at 12:39 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote:

> given the limited info and also time, could we start a consensus call with some conditional
> element?
> I mean we ask general support for joining this open letter within IGC as 
> consensus call and also ask the organizer to modify the wording that reflects the 
> latest and accurate info?
> 
> and maybe the details can be left to us, co-coordinators if IGC also agrees.


That's a good plan; members please express your views on whether we should subscribe to this open letter, subject to minor editing which we will explore in the meantime.  Izumi and I will assess the IGC's position by COB tomorrow.

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/3a83f7ba/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/3a83f7ba/attachment.bin>

From dogwallah at gmail.com  Wed Oct  5 23:12:24 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 06:12:24 +0300
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
 <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxhPOTkFyvvGf+xsOE0UbEr0DKJs2Lxn+o0bjB6=PAS5dg@mail.gmail.com>

ok, by me.  Kind of rude to edit someone else's letter tho.

-- 
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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Thu Oct  6 07:02:22 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 08:02:22 -0300
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
Message-ID: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>

The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been scheduled for
31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will be open only for
participants of the WG, but as the chair has changed, I think it could be
useful to write to him and ask about the possibility of allowing observers
in the room.

So far only the last two reports have been made available in the website,
but Peter Major said he is going to present an input for discussion.

http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068&lang=1&m=22711&year=2011&month=10

Best,
Marília

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/ea3cf506/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  6 08:48:40 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 17:48:40 +0500
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000301cc8426$47d496c0$d77dc440$@yahoo.com>

Thanks Marilia, for information sharing in time.

 

I would also support your recommended proposal to write the chair for allow
some one as observer in the meeting.

 

Thanks

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

 

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Marilia Maciel
Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 04:02 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled

 

 

The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been scheduled for
31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will be open only for
participants of the WG, but as the chair has changed, I think it could be
useful to write to him and ask about the possibility of allowing observers
in the room. 

 

So far only the last two reports have been made available in the website,
but Peter Major said he is going to present an input for discussion.

 

http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068
<http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068&lang=1&m=22711&y
ear=2011&month=10> &lang=1&m=22711&year=2011&month=10

 

Best,

Marília


 

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/b0d1a4be/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct  6 06:57:47 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 22:57:47 +1200
Subject: [governance] Acknowledgement and Expression of Gratitude
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCh98Y=e9CTeusDDagCcWHKD=je99X_O2S_ft5mmsP3zQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

I would like to publicly thank the Kenyans for hosting the IGF this year, it
was certainly memorable. It was great to experience the Kenyan hospitality
and also thank you to all who helped to make it an interesting Forum.

I will never forget seeing the monkeys play in the trees next to the tent on
Day 1 in the afternoon as if to say, "Welcome to Kenya!" nor watching with
amusement as birds (hawks or a breed of eagles ???) swoop to take people's
food off their plates at lunch time on Day 2.

It was great to meet old friends and make new ones. Thank you also to Grace
for making our time at the airport immigration a seamless one.
Asante sana Kenya!

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/2ebf02bc/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Thu Oct  6 11:27:25 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 20:57:25 +0530
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492> <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com> <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>

I am not happy with the IGC just calling for civil society inclusion. It
is not enough if 20 largest governments along with largely their
industry take important Internet related decisions, even if they include
respective civil societies (or even the broader global civil society) .
Internet is global, and its major decisions should be taken by a
globally representative forum. For this reason, whenever we write such
letters for including civil society in select country confabulations, we
should also ask for all countries to be included. For this purpose
appropriate institutional forms must be evolved.

I have no basic objection to some country meeting on select issues and
discussing things, However, this kind of thing happening in the context
of a deep global democratic deficit in IG area, and to the extent such
meeting perpetuate this democratic deficit, is what is the problem. We
must have a clear view on this 'problem'.

Otherwise I find the letter quite good.

Can we inquire with the drafters of the letter if we can add a sentence
on non inclusion of all countries in such 'global' IG discussions as we
call for inclusion of the civil society.

parminder



On Thursday 06 October 2011 06:32 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> On 06/10/2011, at 12:39 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>
>> given the limited info and also time, could we start a consensus call
>> with some conditional
>> element?
>> I mean we ask general support for joining this open letter within IGC as
>> consensus call and also ask the organizer to modify the wording that
>> reflects the
>> latest and accurate info?
>>
>> and maybe the details can be left to us, co-coordinators if IGC also
>> agrees.
>
> That's a good plan; members please express your views on whether we
> should subscribe to this open letter, subject to minor editing which
> we will explore in the meantime. Izumi and I will assess the IGC's
> position by COB tomorrow.
>
> -- 
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer
> groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only
> independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over
> 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful
> international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> _www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
> _Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
> print this email unless necessary.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/06a11a1c/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, 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


From kabani at isd-rc.org  Thu Oct  6 02:34:30 2011
From: kabani at isd-rc.org (Asif Kabani)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 11:34:30 +0500
Subject: [governance] Election Statement
In-Reply-To: <1317809158975673000@crossriverstate.gov.ng>
References: <1317809158975673000@crossriverstate.gov.ng>
Message-ID: <CAOzvoR09+xjsqG0-z2C-H==3Am-7YnSmoUa1ktwxjKBkUD-u8w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Sonigitu

Thank you for your message, Good to hear from you.

Regards

On 5 October 2011 15:05, Sonigitu Ekpe
<sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng>wrote:

> Fellows and friends,****
>
>
> Understanding the complex multidisciplinary nature and regime involving
> many issues, actors, mechanisms, procedures and instruments; I present
> myself for service in the next election for the *Internet Governance
> Caucus (IGC) - **Coordinator*.****
>
> *
> *
>
> *“Do we have to Universalize Internet Governance development at the
> expense of the richness of diversity?”*
>
> *
> *
>
> *‘How can we promote universal understanding, taking into account what
> Internet Governance development means to each community without promoting
> the hegemony of our own perception of Internet Governance development?’*
>
>
> Free Internet will lead to more transparency and political accountability
> which I greatly preserve, keeping in mind the borderless nature of the
> Internet.****
>
>
> My vision is to utilize and harmonise resources, human and material
> resources for the continuous development of the Internet for the benefit of
> the generality of man and our environment, to the glory of the Almighty.**
> **
>
>
> To the Internet Governance Caucus, I pledge my love and toil and with
> abiding faith in Almighty Creator, aspire to develop a well-articulated,
> determined, coordinated and disciplined program to succeed. The like of
> which has not to date been obtained in IGC.****
>
>
> With a focus on Top Down services from our team to help up-lift the poor
> that act in Bottom Up activities; with the involvement of a variety of
> stakeholders who differ in many aspects, including international legal
> capacity with interest in Internet Governance issues, and available
> expertise to:****
>
>
>    - ·        Promote the growth of mutual trust and respect for all
>    - ·       Reach out with governments and inter-governmental agencies
>    through the enhancement of Civil Society Voice and non-state actors in the
>    Internet Governance Forum process.
>    - ·        To be part of a team that will lay out an approach that
>    unifies our engagement in ushering a new era of International Cooperation.
>    - ·        Together, we can work to build a future for the IGC that is
>    open, interoperable, secure and reliable.
>    - ·    Creating enabling environment for increase collaborations among
>    the multi-stakeholders to contribute to the discussion and implementation of
>    outcomes with governments which will truly promote the vertical and
>    horizontal management of the Internet.
>
>
> The Internet continues to expand at a rapid rate, not only in terms of the
> number of users but also in terms of the services that it offers. And I
> believe we all want the IGC transformation with vast potentials resulting in
> good relationship with Business and Technical communities.****
>
>
> To achieve the above, I propose to put in place the following:
>
> a.     1.  Strategy and contact Committee ****
>
> b.     2. Economic Committee****
>
> c.      3.  Finance Committee****
>
>
> With the following terms of reference:****
>
>
>    - ·             Strategy and Contact Committee
>
> o   Identify specific goals and objectives****
>
> o   Develop programmes for achieving goals****
>
> o   Establish contacts and links with governments, private sector, Civil
> Societies, non-state actors and intergovernmental agencies****
>
> o   Develop strategies for political empowerment****
>
> o   Lobbying****
>
> o   Propaganda****
>
> o   Press relations****
>
> o   Protocol****
>
>
>    - ·           Economic Committee
>
> o   Develop economic blueprint for the Internet Governance Caucus****
>
> o   Analyse investment and research opportunities****
>
> o   Monitor implementation of projects****
>
>
>    - ·        Finance Committee
>
> o   Identify ways of enhancing financial positions of members****
>
> o   Prepare revenue projections****
>
> o   Identify and harness ways and means of generating funds****
>
> o   Identify specific source of funding for specific projects****
>
> o   Treasury****
>
>
> Finally, with variable geometric approach, we will bridge the principal
> challenge for many governments to develop a strategy to gather and
> effectively coordinate support from non-state actors, such as universities,
> private companies, and non-governmental organizations that have the
> necessary expertise to deal with Internet Governance Issues.****
>
> *
> *
>
> *Your votes will make a great difference*.****
>
>
> Thank you.****
>
>
> Sonigitu Ekpe Aji ****
>
> (aka) *Sea*****
>
> --
> Sonigitu Ekpe
> *Project Support Officer[Agriculturist]*
> Cross River Farm Credit Scheme
> Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources
> 3 Barracks Road P.M.B. 1119
> Calabar - Cross River State, Nigeria.
> Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179
>  *"LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving"  *
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> The information contained in this communication is confidential and may be
> legally privileged. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or
> entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to receive it. If you
> are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
> copying, distribution or taking action in reliance of the contents of this
> information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Kindly destroy this
> message and notify the sender by replying the email in such instances. We do
> not accept responsibility for any changes made to this message after it was
> originally sent and any views, opinions, conclusions or other information in
> this message which do not relate to the business of this firm or are not
> authorized by us.The Cross River State Government is not liable neither for
> the proper and complete transmission of the information contained in this
> communication nor any delay in its receipt.
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Asif Kabani
Email: kabani.asif at gmail.com


“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/c16de227/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Thu Oct  6 16:47:33 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 21:47:33 +0100
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
	<642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>
	<CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
	<A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>
	<4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <CALLeeau61UFZopxWCQoBzDDCiRCnNTmWZNvXskOniQYPA3g8Gw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Great inputs from Parminder!

Warm regards,

On 6 Oct 2011 20:43, "parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

**
I am not happy with the IGC just calling for civil society inclusion. It is
not enough if 20 largest governments along with largely their industry take
important Internet related decisions, even if they include respective civil
societies (or even the broader global civil society) . Internet is global,
and its major decisions should be taken by a globally representative forum.
For this reason, whenever we write such letters for including civil society
in select country confabulations, we should also ask for all countries to be
included. For this purpose appropriate institutional forms must be evolved.

I have no basic objection to some country meeting on select issues and
discussing things, However, this kind of thing happening in the context of a
deep global democratic deficit in IG area, and to the extent such meeting
perpetuate this democratic deficit, is what is the problem. We must have a
clear view on this 'problem'.

Otherwise I find the letter quite good.

Can we inquire with the drafters of the letter if we can add a sentence on
non inclusion of all countries in such 'global' IG discussions as we call
for inclusion of the civil society.

parminder



On Thursday 06 October 2011 06:32 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>
> On 06/10/2011, at 12:39 AM, Izu...

____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/7766a0b9/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Thu Oct  6 16:55:36 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 21:55:36 +0100
Subject: [governance] Acknowledgement and Expression of Gratitude
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiCh98Y=e9CTeusDDagCcWHKD=je99X_O2S_ft5mmsP3zQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiCh98Y=e9CTeusDDagCcWHKD=je99X_O2S_ft5mmsP3zQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeavi4evGb7_y9D9GYLtrDc9iWMpSpkaHovrUhfvmMYzO7A@mail.gmail.com>

It was really a beautiful experience Sala!

This is how the Internet will make all Nations beautiful and welcoming to
humans of all race.

I had a great remote participation from my base.

Warm regards,

Sea

On 6 Oct 2011 20:34, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

Dear All,

I would like to publicly thank the Kenyans for hosting the IGF this year, it
was certainly memorable. It was great to experience the Kenyan hospitality
and also thank you to all who helped to make it an interesting Forum.

I will never forget seeing the monkeys play in the trees next to the tent on
Day 1 in the afternoon as if to say, "Welcome to Kenya!" nor watching with
amusement as birds (hawks or a breed of eagles ???) swoop to take people's
food off their plates at lunch time on Day 2.

It was great to meet old friends and make new ones. Thank you also to Grace
for making our time at the airport immigration a seamless one.
Asante sana Kenya!

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851




____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/e18526e6/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Thu Oct  6 17:01:14 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 22:01:14 +0100
Subject: [governance] Election Statement
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeauyeje2_9tazuN_NbRH-1eJyhNxWukgx49rsD=oVO--Lw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1317809158975673000@crossriverstate.gov.ng>
	<CAOzvoR09+xjsqG0-z2C-H==3Am-7YnSmoUa1ktwxjKBkUD-u8w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALLeeatAGYFJFBnTBZ5MWoPfDBuPvpENtdB8UfdeLsoW5vuXYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALLeeauyeje2_9tazuN_NbRH-1eJyhNxWukgx49rsD=oVO--Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeavbZupy6LaBTRoE_JPkupn0S6VEeePdM9XksbCdJsccmA@mail.gmail.com>

Great Asif,

Thank you for the acknowledgments.

Warm regards,

Sea

On 6 Oct 2011 07:34, "Asif Kabani" <kabani at isd-rc.org> wrote:

Dear Sonigitu

Thank you for your message, Good to hear from you.

Regards

On 5 October 2011 15:05, Sonigitu Ekpe <sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng>
wrote:

> >
> > Fellows and friends,
> >
> >
> > Understanding the complex multidisciplinary nature and regime involvi...
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Asif Kabani
Email: kabani.asif at gmail.com


“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111006/fa82f136/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, 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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Thu Oct  6 17:14:10 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 00:14:10 +0300
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeau61UFZopxWCQoBzDDCiRCnNTmWZNvXskOniQYPA3g8Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
 <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org> <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
 <CALLeeau61UFZopxWCQoBzDDCiRCnNTmWZNvXskOniQYPA3g8Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxgY=0bOb1OEPZcLYM7uWwR8j1HrreCNHQk6xz5=x6p04Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Sonigitu Ekpe
<sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Great inputs from Parminder!


Except that he wants "major decisions should be taken by a globally
representative forum.", when in fact, it is multiple fora each making
decisions about their own little corner of the Internet that has been
the successful model of what we now call Internet governance.


-- 
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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Fri Oct  7 00:08:58 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 09:38:58 +0530
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxgY=0bOb1OEPZcLYM7uWwR8j1HrreCNHQk6xz5=x6p04Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492> <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com> <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org> <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net> <CALLeeau61UFZopxWCQoBzDDCiRCnNTmWZNvXskOniQYPA3g8Gw@mail.gmail.com> <CACAaNxgY=0bOb1OEPZcLYM7uWwR8j1HrreCNHQk6xz5=x6p04Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E8E7B5A.9060500@itforchange.net>


On Friday 07 October 2011 02:44 AM, McTim wrote:
>
> Except that he wants "major decisions should be taken by a globally
> representative forum.",

The reference to a 'globally representative forum' is vis a vis the kind 
of 'decisions' that OECD, G 8 and G 20 kind of forums take. In general, 
for a wiser set of functions we can speak of forums instead of forum as 
long as we dont forget the 'globally representative part'. It is also 
somewhat amazing how easily how ignore that part - about the 
undemocratic nature of global decisions/ policy making in relation to 
the Internet.

> when in fact, it is multiple fora each making
> decisions about their own little corner of the Internet

'the little corner' thing is a myth. Most of them make decisions for the 
Internet for the whole world, and you know it.

>   that has been
> the successful model of what we now call Internet governance.
>    

Successful for whom? That always is 'the' question. Internet's net 
neutrality is now increasingly being 'officially' transgressed. What was 
a public network of millions of networks, is now increasingly largely 
consisting of few mega private spaces. The story can go on.......  
parminder


>
>    
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/b1aa69b1/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Fri Oct  7 00:17:37 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 12:17:37 +0800
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492> <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com> <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org> <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <4E8E7D61.7040900@ciroap.org>

On 06/10/11 23:27, parminder wrote:
> Can we inquire with the drafters of the letter if we can add a
> sentence on non inclusion of all countries in such 'global' IG
> discussions as we call for inclusion of the civil society.

Irene Prevedello is following this list but I will also specifically ask
her about this off-list too.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/e203dce7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/e203dce7/attachment.bin>

From iza at anr.org  Fri Oct  7 00:22:42 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:22:42 +0900
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <4E8E7D61.7040900@ciroap.org>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
 <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org> <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
 <4E8E7D61.7040900@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKg8R9GwBQrD8fh-FJH3MYZ2aEfnsOFW2j28dKBp6bx3fQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Jeremy,
I also agree with Parminder to ask for additional sentence is a good request.
Hope it be included in time. If not, we can still sign and continue to
expand the scope. I am sure the drafter will agree, though.

The letter saying "the process leading and following these meetings".

izumi

2011年10月7日13:17 Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>:
> On 06/10/11 23:27, parminder wrote:
>
> Can we inquire with the drafters of the letter if we can add a sentence on
> non inclusion of all countries in such 'global' IG discussions as we call
> for inclusion of the civil society.
>
> Irene Prevedello is following this list but I will also specifically ask her
> about this off-list too.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless
> necessary.



-- 
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<
          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
                              www.anr.org
____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Fri Oct  7 02:35:49 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 14:35:49 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of 18-19
 Summit?
Message-ID: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>

The IBSA proposal, in some form, will be issued at the upcoming Summit
on 18-19 October.  This leaves us about a week if we want to issue a
statement ahead of that Summit with our input on the proposal.

Should we do this?

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/610e0cfc/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/610e0cfc/attachment.bin>

From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Fri Oct  7 03:04:22 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 08:04:22 +0100
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CALLeeau47WemSzAUAfD5-BAYdevVy5DQyK-CWAz5VeiJQ-YEgg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jeremy,

Greetings!
Thanks for the update.

It will be very very useful to issue a statement ahead of the summit.

Warm regards.

Sonigitu Ekpe
*Project Support Officer[Agriculturist]*
Cross River Farm Credit Scheme
Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources
3 Barracks Road P.M.B. 1119
Calabar - Cross River State, Nigeria.
Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179

Skype: sonigitu.asibong.ekpe.aji

 *"LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving" *




On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> **
> The IBSA proposal, in some form, will be issued at the upcoming Summit on
> 18-19 October.  This leaves us about a week if we want to issue a statement
> ahead of that Summit with our input on the proposal.
>
> Should we do this?
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/d7693fb4/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, 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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 04:06:53 2011
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:06:53 +0500
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHuaJtOj+0uZ_5ASeZz-TDJ3dAq2aP6od-zKj0TJToKNSaYz0g@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Marilia,

Apparently this will be for the working group members to decide if
they wish to open up the working group to non-contributing observers.
In my discussion with the new chair, and as I asked this question,
there appeared to be no understanding so far about allowing observers
so this may be an important discussion point to raise. Does the
working group have some mailing list where this question can be raised
by its members?

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been scheduled for
> 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will be open only for
> participants of the WG, but as the chair has changed, I think it could be
> useful to write to him and ask about the possibility of allowing observers
> in the room.
> So far only the last two reports have been made available in the website,
> but Peter Major said he is going to present an input for discussion.
>
> http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068&lang=1&m=22711&year=2011&month=10
> Best,
> Marília
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad
____________________________________________________________
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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 04:09:45 2011
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:09:45 +0500
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAHuaJtMgkosL_cneV8tyE+Bmvvie_DKbBWv3bE9JxfdAeUDcWw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Jeremy,

Is there any document that details the IBSA Internet Governance
Proposal? So far I have read two documents, one from last year and a
summary from this year but it seems that I am unable to find a
detailed document/transcript/record of the discussion and proposal. It
would be wise to first read through the whole document before we
attempt to create a statement?

Best

Fouad

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> The IBSA proposal, in some form, will be issued at the upcoming Summit on
> 18-19 October.  This leaves us about a week if we want to issue a statement
> ahead of that Summit with our input on the proposal.
>
> Should we do this?
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. 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, 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


From fouadbajwa at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 04:16:02 2011
From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 13:16:02 +0500
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <4E8E7B5A.9060500@itforchange.net>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
	<642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org>
	<CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
	<A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org>
	<4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
	<CALLeeau61UFZopxWCQoBzDDCiRCnNTmWZNvXskOniQYPA3g8Gw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACAaNxgY=0bOb1OEPZcLYM7uWwR8j1HrreCNHQk6xz5=x6p04Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E8E7B5A.9060500@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <CAHuaJtP4UUHVhCCNvcU5nfiRPB18Kf87Oz5Nn+ZGN+mzmf6pmQ@mail.gmail.com>

I agree with Parminders view about globally representative forums.......

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 9:08 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> On Friday 07 October 2011 02:44 AM, McTim wrote:
>
> Except that he wants "major decisions should be taken by a globally
> representative forum.",
>
> The reference to a 'globally representative forum' is vis a vis the kind of
> 'decisions' that OECD, G 8 and G 20 kind of forums take. In general, for a
> wiser set of functions we can speak of forums instead of forum as long as we
> dont forget the 'globally representative part'. It is also somewhat amazing
> how easily how ignore that part - about the undemocratic nature of global
> decisions/ policy making in relation to the Internet.
>
> when in fact, it is multiple fora each making
> decisions about their own little corner of the Internet
>
> 'the little corner' thing is a myth. Most of them make decisions for the
> Internet for the whole world, and you know it.
>
>  that has been
> the successful model of what we now call Internet governance.
>
>
> Successful for whom? That always is 'the' question. Internet's net
> neutrality is now increasingly being 'officially' transgressed. What was a
> public network of millions of networks, is now increasingly largely
> consisting of few mega private spaces. The story can go on.......  parminder
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>



-- 
Regards.
--------------------------
Fouad
____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Fri Oct  7 04:25:27 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:25:27 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAHuaJtMgkosL_cneV8tyE+Bmvvie_DKbBWv3bE9JxfdAeUDcWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org> <CAHuaJtMgkosL_cneV8tyE+Bmvvie_DKbBWv3bE9JxfdAeUDcWw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E8EB777.8010108@ciroap.org>

On 07/10/11 16:09, Fouad Bajwa wrote:
> Is there any document that details the IBSA Internet Governance
> Proposal? So far I have read two documents, one from last year and a
> summary from this year but it seems that I am unable to find a
> detailed document/transcript/record of the discussion and proposal. It
> would be wise to first read through the whole document before we
> attempt to create a statement?

Not yet.  The summary document is at
http://www.culturalivre.org.br/artigos/IBSA_recommendations_Internet_Governance.pdf. 
The more detailed document is scheduled to be presented in Durban this
month, hopefully incorporating some of the feedback received on the summary.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/c6e54bf3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/c6e54bf3/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 06:00:24 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 22:00:24 +1200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations to Nobel Peace Prize Recipients!
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>

To the Women who received the Nobel Peace Prize and the struggle for peace
in Liberia and Yemen and for whom you represent and the countless lives that
were lost in the process, the prize is also in their memory. I will never
forget the impact that "Iron Women in Liberia" had on me as I watched the
documentary a few years ago. Congratulations!

(http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/)

   -


The Nobel Peace Prize 2011Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, Tawakkul
Karman
The Nobel Peace Prize
2011<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Ellen
Johnson Sirleaf<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Leymah
Gbowee <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Tawakkul
Karman <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>
[image: Ellen Johnson
Sirleaf]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/johnson_sirleaf.html>
Photo: A. Cruz/ABr. Creative Commons License Attr. 2.5 Brazil
[image: Leymah Gbowee]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/gbowee.html>
Photo: Michael Angelo for Wonderland
[image: Tawakkul
Karman]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/karman.html>
Photo: Ahmed Jadallah/Scanpix
Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
Leymah Gbowee
Tawakkul Karman

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/9b3d02f4/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, 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


From admin at alkasir.com  Fri Oct  7 06:13:32 2011
From: admin at alkasir.com (Walid AL-SAQAF <alkasir admin>)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 12:13:32 +0200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations to Nobel Peace Prize Recipients!
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKJSUiwgcosHdZTDHqpkep=zjKiF20-9AMU+FJPCo-01=yp9vw@mail.gmail.com>

Indeed, particularly my colleague Tawakkol has been really struggling under
government threats. She is a symbol of women in the ongoing Arab Spring.
What a good time to reflect the true picture of Yemen, something the world
never saw. BTW, here is a link to a TED Talk by my sister Nadia that came in
good time to show the real Yemen that is different than what is portrayed by
the mainstream media:
http://www.ted.com/talks/nadia_al_sakkaf_see_yemen_through_my_eyes.html

Sincerely,

Walid

-----------------

Walid Al-Saqaf
Founder & Administrator
alkasir for mapping and circumventing cyber censorship
https://alkasir.com <walid.al-saqaf at oru.se>


On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> To the Women who received the Nobel Peace Prize and the struggle for peace
> in Liberia and Yemen and for whom you represent and the countless lives that
> were lost in the process, the prize is also in their memory. I will never
> forget the impact that "Iron Women in Liberia" had on me as I watched the
> documentary a few years ago. Congratulations!
>
> (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/)
>
>    -
>
>
>  The Nobel Peace Prize 2011 Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, Tawakkul
> Karman
>  The Nobel Peace Prize 2011<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#> Ellen
> Johnson Sirleaf<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#> Leymah
> Gbowee <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#> Tawakkul
> Karman <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>
> [image: Ellen Johnson Sirleaf]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/johnson_sirleaf.html>
> Photo: A. Cruz/ABr. Creative Commons License Attr. 2.5 Brazil
> [image: Leymah Gbowee]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/gbowee.html>
> Photo: Michael Angelo for Wonderland
> [image: Tawakkul Karman]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/karman.html>
> Photo: Ahmed Jadallah/Scanpix
>  Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
> Leymah Gbowee
> Tawakkul Karman
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/242c6384/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, 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


From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Fri Oct  7 06:15:00 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 19:15:00 +0900
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19  Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@[192.168.1.160]>

So we're commenting on the summary?

Perhaps we should just endorse the Nupef's statement 
<http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84> ?

Adam



>The IBSA proposal, in some form, will be issued at the upcoming 
>Summit on 18-19 October.  This leaves us about a week if we want to 
>issue a statement ahead of that Summit with our input on the 
>proposal.
>
>Should we do this?
>
>--
>
>Dr 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
>
>Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer 
>groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only 
>independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 
>220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a 
>powerful international movement to help protect and empower 
>consumers everywhere.
><http://www.consumersinternational.org/>www.consumersinternational.org
><http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
>Read our 
><http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> email 
>confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>
>Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
>Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:smime 37.p7s (    /    ) (0053DD04)

____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 06:21:58 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 22:21:58 +1200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations to Nobel Peace Prize Recipients!
In-Reply-To: <CAKJSUiwgcosHdZTDHqpkep=zjKiF20-9AMU+FJPCo-01=yp9vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKJSUiwgcosHdZTDHqpkep=zjKiF20-9AMU+FJPCo-01=yp9vw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDdKHaRRi-m76cWVZGLwtrhS278mBh06FGv8Qx2xk=gxA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Walid. I enjoyed the link.

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Walid AL-SAQAF <alkasir admin> <
admin at alkasir.com> wrote:

> Indeed, particularly my colleague Tawakkol has been really struggling under
> government threats. She is a symbol of women in the ongoing Arab Spring.
> What a good time to reflect the true picture of Yemen, something the world
> never saw. BTW, here is a link to a TED Talk by my sister Nadia that came in
> good time to show the real Yemen that is different than what is portrayed by
> the mainstream media:
> http://www.ted.com/talks/nadia_al_sakkaf_see_yemen_through_my_eyes.html
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Walid
>
> -----------------
>
> Walid Al-Saqaf
> Founder & Administrator
> alkasir for mapping and circumventing cyber censorship
> https://alkasir.com <walid.al-saqaf at oru.se>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> To the Women who received the Nobel Peace Prize and the struggle for peace
>> in Liberia and Yemen and for whom you represent and the countless lives that
>> were lost in the process, the prize is also in their memory. I will never
>> forget the impact that "Iron Women in Liberia" had on me as I watched the
>> documentary a few years ago. Congratulations!
>>
>> (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/)
>>
>>    -
>>
>>
>>  The Nobel Peace Prize 2011 Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee,
>> Tawakkul Karman
>>  The Nobel Peace Prize 2011<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#> Ellen
>> Johnson Sirleaf<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#> Leymah
>> Gbowee <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#> Tawakkul
>> Karman <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>
>> [image: Ellen Johnson Sirleaf]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/johnson_sirleaf.html>
>> Photo: A. Cruz/ABr. Creative Commons License Attr. 2.5 Brazil
>> [image: Leymah Gbowee]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/gbowee.html>
>> Photo: Michael Angelo for Wonderland
>> [image: Tawakkul Karman]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/karman.html>
>> Photo: Ahmed Jadallah/Scanpix
>>  Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
>> Leymah Gbowee
>> Tawakkul Karman
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/22cfb3b3/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Fri Oct  7 06:24:46 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 11:24:46 +0100
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CAHuaJtOj+0uZ_5ASeZz-TDJ3dAq2aP6od-zKj0TJToKNSaYz0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHuaJtOj+0uZ_5ASeZz-TDJ3dAq2aP6od-zKj0TJToKNSaYz0g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeaugixHFY9Qz5hn6DSsTixCNDy+gK42qBozoc2eR3qHgEg@mail.gmail.com>

Good point Fouad.

It will be fine to get contacts for further discussions on this.

Sonigitu Ekpe
*Project Support Officer[Agriculturist]*
Cross River Farm Credit Scheme
Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources
3 Barracks Road P.M.B. 1119
Calabar - Cross River State, Nigeria.
Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179

Skype: sonigitu.asibong.ekpe.aji

 *"LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving" *




On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Marilia,
>
> Apparently this will be for the working group members to decide if
> they wish to open up the working group to non-contributing observers.
> In my discussion with the new chair, and as I asked this question,
> there appeared to be no understanding so far about allowing observers
> so this may be an important discussion point to raise. Does the
> working group have some mailing list where this question can be raised
> by its members?
>
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been scheduled
> for
> > 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will be open only for
> > participants of the WG, but as the chair has changed, I think it could be
> > useful to write to him and ask about the possibility of allowing
> observers
> > in the room.
> > So far only the last two reports have been made available in the website,
> > but Peter Major said he is going to present an input for discussion.
> >
> >
> http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Meeting.asp?intItemID=2068&lang=1&m=22711&year=2011&month=10
> > Best,
> > Marília
> >
> > --
> > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> > FGV Direito Rio
> >
> > Center for Technology and Society
> > Getulio Vargas Foundation
> > Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
> >
> --
> Regards.
> --------------------------
> Fouad
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/0882d1b5/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, 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


From nyangkweagien at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 06:29:27 2011
From: nyangkweagien at gmail.com (Nyangkwe Agien Aaron)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 12:29:27 +0200
Subject: [governance] Congratulations to Nobel Peace Prize Recipients!
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM29qGbybFWJP1bhDr5OeQJQPgoQ8egxsjALV7fEOHX=DcUSCg@mail.gmail.com>

Congratualtions to the winners.
I'll rcommend that they stay in the foot steps of Maathai Waangari and
not be stooges of the West as Desmond Tutu, Koffi Annan and Wole
Soyinka have proven if we go by their pronouncements on events in
Ivory Cooast and Libya.

Obama won the peace prize and encouraged the war in Ivory Coast and
Libya while Ellen Johnson encouraged the war in Côte d'Ivoire and
Libya before winning the prize. A paradox?

Aaron


On 10/7/11, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> To the Women who received the Nobel Peace Prize and the struggle for peace
> in Liberia and Yemen and for whom you represent and the countless lives that
> were lost in the process, the prize is also in their memory. I will never
> forget the impact that "Iron Women in Liberia" had on me as I watched the
> documentary a few years ago. Congratulations!
>
> (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/)
>
>    -
>
>
> The Nobel Peace Prize 2011Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, Tawakkul
> Karman
> The Nobel Peace Prize
> 2011<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Ellen
> Johnson
> Sirleaf<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Leymah
> Gbowee
> <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Tawakkul
> Karman <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>
> [image: Ellen Johnson
> Sirleaf]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/johnson_sirleaf.html>
> Photo: A. Cruz/ABr. Creative Commons License Attr. 2.5 Brazil
> [image: Leymah
> Gbowee]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/gbowee.html>
> Photo: Michael Angelo for Wonderland
> [image: Tawakkul
> Karman]<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/karman.html>
> Photo: Ahmed Jadallah/Scanpix
> Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
> Leymah Gbowee
> Tawakkul Karman
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>


-- 
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist-OutCome Mapper
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Fri Oct  7 06:41:16 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 18:41:16 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19  Summit?
In-Reply-To: <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@[192.168.1.160]>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org> <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@[192.168.1.160]>
Message-ID: <4E8ED74C.1070200@ciroap.org>

On 07/10/11 18:15, Adam Peake wrote:
> So we're commenting on the summary?
>
> Perhaps we should just endorse the Nupef's statement
> <http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84> ?

Or we could delay by a couple of weeks and comment on whatever is
presented at the Summit.  My ulterior motive for suggesting we do
something earlier is that there is a chance that I, or at least a
colleague, may be in South Africa for the Summit and could present
something in person.  But if we have nothing to add to what we have said
at the IGF or what Nupef has said, there may be no need.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/153cddfb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/153cddfb/attachment.bin>

From ajp at glocom.ac.jp  Fri Oct  7 07:08:25 2011
From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 20:08:25 +0900
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
  18-19  Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E8ED74C.1070200@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
 <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@[192.168.1.160]> <4E8ED74C.1070200@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <p0624080fcab48c5da554@[192.168.1.160]>

It's worth stying something, endorse Nupef and go further:  emphasize 
our disappointment that the recommendation is misleadingly 
represented as the outcome of an multi-stakeholder meeting.  That the 
IGC strongly disagrees with the creation of a new body, and strongly 
disagrees with the six points about such a body.  Suggest that the 
creation of an IBSA IG development observatory based on such 
misleading interpretations would be ill advised.

Adam



>On 07/10/11 18:15, Adam Peake wrote:
>
>>So we're commenting on the summary?
>>
>>Perhaps we should just endorse the Nupef's statement 
>><http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84><http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84> 
>>?
>>
>
>Or we could delay by a couple of weeks and comment on whatever is 
>presented at the Summit.  My ulterior motive for suggesting we do 
>something earlier is that there is a chance that I, or at least a 
>colleague, may be in South Africa for the Summit and could present 
>something in person.  But if we have nothing to add to what we have 
>said at the IGF or what Nupef has said, there may be no need.
>
>--
>
>Dr 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
>
>Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer 
>groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only 
>independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 
>220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a 
>powerful international movement to help protect and empower 
>consumers everywhere.
><http://www.consumersinternational.org/>www.consumersinternational.org
><http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
>Read our 
><http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> email 
>confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>
>Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
>Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:smime 40.p7s (    /    ) (005491F3)

____________________________________________________________
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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 07:09:47 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:09:47 +0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <p0624080fcab48c5da554@192.168.1.160>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org> <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
 <4E8ED74C.1070200@ciroap.org> <p0624080fcab48c5da554@192.168.1.160>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxiQ8y7fKnvQNK_wUR_hwPoawhXQHc34PvTUfOCm4VSZcQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> It's worth stying something, endorse Nupef and go further:  emphasize our
> disappointment that the recommendation is misleadingly represented as the
> outcome of an multi-stakeholder meeting.  That the IGC strongly disagrees
> with the creation of a new body, and strongly disagrees with the six points
> about such a body.  Suggest that the creation of an IBSA IG development
> observatory based on such misleading interpretations would be ill advised.

+1

-- 
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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 07:17:15 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 23:17:15 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxiQ8y7fKnvQNK_wUR_hwPoawhXQHc34PvTUfOCm4VSZcQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
	<4E8ED74C.1070200@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080fcab48c5da554@192.168.1.160>
	<CACAaNxiQ8y7fKnvQNK_wUR_hwPoawhXQHc34PvTUfOCm4VSZcQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCpv_EE8hu0rhLNojVMUwDCEqLgrcEt3fN2+eNHoh3u6g@mail.gmail.com>

Actually I propose that the IGC does not rely on Nupef's submissions soley.
It is critical that the global civil society has a view on the issue as we
could be later blamed for not speaking out when we had the opportunity to do
so. These are some thoughts:

Noting that reference to the IBSA Multistakeholder meeting on Global
Internet Governance was restricted to public and private sector within India
and Brazil and civil society in Brazil although there has been some notable
contentions by Nupef [insert hyperlink to Nupef’s publicised statement].


Acknowledging the advice given to the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) by
one of the organisers of the IBSA meeting.


Noting that the spirit of Global Internet Governance demands that any
discussions affecting the evolution of internet governance discussions
should involve the global internet community through the global internet
governance forums that are convened annually;


[Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote on the
issue – although we should be prepared for the results]


My personal views on the matter are that the greatest strength of the
Internet Governance Forum is that it is transparent, democratic and
multi-stakeholder and to create an institution to manage global internet
processes to develop processes for internet at global level needs to be
urgently addressed could threaten vulnerable groups. In WGIG 2005 Report V.
A. 36 recommended the “creation of new space for dialogue for all
stakeholders on an equal footing on all Internet governance related issues”.


Acknowledging that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there is merit
in improving institutional coordination as well as coordination among all
stakeholders at the regional, subregional and national levels, the IGC
believes that this does not justify the creation of an institution.


The United Nations Internet Governance Secretariat (“Secretariat”) already
exists and if the stakeholders within the IBSA feel that coordination can be
improved then it should communicate to the Secretariat what it feels could
be strengthened. In my view to bypass the Secretariat and lobby within the
United Nations General Assembly is to act in bad faith of the machinery that
is already available to us as members of the Internet Universe.


In UN meetings, only governments are given votes and in some instances there
are forced governments which are not elected etc. In having a forum like the
current IGF model people can have freedom of expression. The use of
“multilateral” goes against the grain of the core definition of Internet
Governance that was developed  in the WGIG 2005 report that the then UN
Secretary General commissioned which was subsequently endorsed by member
states of the UN.


The WGIG 2005 Report further reinforced the inclusiveness approach and to
shift the spotlight on a single spectrum, albeit powerful spectrum, is to
forever alter the “inclusiveness” approach. Did the Tunis Agenda mention
“multilateral”?


In fact Part IV of the WGIG 2005 Report talks about developing a common
understanding of the roles of government, private sector and civil society.


The use of fragmentation of the internet, disjointed policy making needs to
be substantiated by solid empirical evidence and research so that in a
transparent nature, the members of the internet universe can decide whether
and how improvements should be made. For instance, I see it as the
responsibility of people from within the regions that they are respectively
from to empower and enlighten their people to participate in policy
processes. If they are denied the opportunity to participate and participate
meaningful, then we have a serious problem but until then, we should seek to
support the multi-stakeholder model.


If for some reason, the developing world feels that they are not given the
opportunity to have their say, then they should speak up and move into
positions where they can contribute and speak up for their communities.  We
need to encourage catalysts within regions to work closely with the United
Nations Internet Governance Secretariat Remote Participation team and
Network Operator Groups (NOGs), Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and other
stakeholders within the region to ensure cohesive participation for all.
This should be an enhancement of process which is something that the
Coordinators can lobby and push for in a strategic coherent manner.



 Sala

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:09 PM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> > It's worth stying something, endorse Nupef and go further:  emphasize our
> > disappointment that the recommendation is misleadingly represented as the
> > outcome of an multi-stakeholder meeting.  That the IGC strongly disagrees
> > with the creation of a new body, and strongly disagrees with the six
> points
> > about such a body.  Suggest that the creation of an IBSA IG development
> > observatory based on such misleading interpretations would be ill
> advised.
>
> +1
>
> --
> 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, 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/5c3749ff/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 07:47:36 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 23:47:36 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiCpv_EE8hu0rhLNojVMUwDCEqLgrcEt3fN2+eNHoh3u6g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
	<4E8ED74C.1070200@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080fcab48c5da554@192.168.1.160>
	<CACAaNxiQ8y7fKnvQNK_wUR_hwPoawhXQHc34PvTUfOCm4VSZcQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCpv_EE8hu0rhLNojVMUwDCEqLgrcEt3fN2+eNHoh3u6g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAbQqqq9fuVpM0T46psC0NFJtiLo0FvwX9GvR7OafOJkQ@mail.gmail.com>

Pardon the typos, it's midnight here :)

On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually I propose that the IGC does not rely on Nupef's submissions soley.
> It is critical that the global civil society has a view on the issue as we
> could be later blamed for not speaking out when we had the opportunity to do
> so. These are some thoughts:
>
> Noting that reference to the IBSA Multistakeholder meeting on Global
> Internet Governance was restricted to public and private sector within India
> and Brazil and civil society in Brazil although there has been some notable
> contentions by Nupef [insert hyperlink to Nupef’s publicised statement].
>
>
> Acknowledging the advice given to the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) by
> one of the organisers of the IBSA meeting.
>
>
> Noting that the spirit of Global Internet Governance demands that any
> discussions affecting the evolution of internet governance discussions
> should involve the global internet community through the global internet
> governance forums that are convened annually;
>
>
> [Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote on
> the issue – although we should be prepared for the results]
>
>
> My personal views on the matter are that the greatest strength of the
> Internet Governance Forum is that it is transparent, democratic and
> multi-stakeholder and to create an institution to manage global internet
> processes to develop processes for internet at global level needs to be
> urgently addressed could threaten vulnerable groups. In WGIG 2005 Report V.
> A. 36 recommended the “creation of new space for dialogue for all
> stakeholders on an equal footing on all Internet governance related issues”.
>
>
> Acknowledging that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there is
> merit in improving institutional coordination as well as coordination among
> all stakeholders at the regional, subregional and national levels, the IGC
> believes that this does not justify the creation of an institution.
>
>
> The United Nations Internet Governance Secretariat (“Secretariat”) already
> exists and if the stakeholders within the IBSA feel that coordination can be
> improved then it should communicate to the Secretariat what it feels could
> be strengthened. In my view to bypass the Secretariat and lobby within the
> United Nations General Assembly is to act in bad faith of the machinery that
> is already available to us as members of the Internet Universe.
>
>
> In UN meetings, only governments are given votes and in some instances
> there are forced governments which are not elected etc. In having a forum
> like the current IGF model people can have freedom of expression. The use of
> “multilateral” goes against the grain of the core definition of Internet
> Governance that was developed  in the WGIG 2005 report that the then UN
> Secretary General commissioned which was subsequently endorsed by member
> states of the UN.
>
>
> The WGIG 2005 Report further reinforced the inclusiveness approach and to
> shift the spotlight on a single spectrum, albeit powerful spectrum, is to
> forever alter the “inclusiveness” approach. Did the Tunis Agenda mention
> “multilateral”?
>
>
> In fact Part IV of the WGIG 2005 Report talks about developing a common
> understanding of the roles of government, private sector and civil society.
>
>
> The use of fragmentation of the internet, disjointed policy making needs to
> be substantiated by solid empirical evidence and research so that in a
> transparent nature, the members of the internet universe can decide whether
> and how improvements should be made. For instance, I see it as the
> responsibility of people from within the regions that they are respectively
> from to empower and enlighten their people to participate in policy
> processes. If they are denied the opportunity to participate and participate
> meaningful, then we have a serious problem but until then, we should seek to
> support the multi-stakeholder model.
>
>
> If for some reason, the developing world feels that they are not given the
> opportunity to have their say, then they should speak up and move into
> positions where they can contribute and speak up for their communities.  We
> need to encourage catalysts within regions to work closely with the United
> Nations Internet Governance Secretariat Remote Participation team and
> Network Operator Groups (NOGs), Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and other
> stakeholders within the region to ensure cohesive participation for all.
> This should be an enhancement of process which is something that the
> Coordinators can lobby and push for in a strategic coherent manner.
>
>
>
>  Sala
>
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 11:09 PM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 2:08 PM, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
>> > It's worth stying something, endorse Nupef and go further:  emphasize
>> our
>> > disappointment that the recommendation is misleadingly represented as
>> the
>> > outcome of an multi-stakeholder meeting.  That the IGC strongly
>> disagrees
>> > with the creation of a new body, and strongly disagrees with the six
>> points
>> > about such a body.  Suggest that the creation of an IBSA IG development
>> > observatory based on such misleading interpretations would be ill
>> advised.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> --
>> 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, 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/d5c10a1d/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Fri Oct  7 09:41:33 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 10:41:33 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19  Summit?
In-Reply-To: <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@[192.168.1.160]>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org> <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@[192.168.1.160]>
Message-ID: <4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>

I think we can and should do better. I recall this part of Nupef's
statement:

"Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
in its content but also in the process of its further development,
including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
participatory and transparent process."

This is what I think we should be proactively doing. What could be
improved, changed (in what direction), discarded and so on? Nupef is
trying to do its part in a dialogue with the BR gov (unfortunately in
pt_br so far). I suspect the SA CS is trying to do the same, and so are
our CS fellows from India.

Time is quite short, though.

frt rgds

--c.a.

On 10/07/2011 07:15 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> So we're commenting on the summary?
> 
> Perhaps we should just endorse the Nupef's statement
> <http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84> ?
> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> 
>> The IBSA proposal, in some form, will be issued at the upcoming Summit
>> on 18-19 October.  This leaves us about a week if we want to issue a
>> statement ahead of that Summit with our input on the proposal.
>>
>> Should we do this?
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Dr 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
>>
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer
>> groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only
>> independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over
>> 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful
>> international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>www.consumersinternational.org
>> <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>Twitter @ConsumersInt
>>
>> Read our <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>
>> email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>>
>> Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
>> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
>> Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
>>
>> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:smime 37.p7s (    /    ) (0053DD04)
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 15:15:16 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 12:15:16 -0700
Subject: FW: Re: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
Message-ID: <166ADED307F040DF9E435558D3B0C894@acer6e40e97492>

Hmmm... So the "1 per cent" are going to have a discussion on "democracy and
the Internet" and "the Internet for all"... that should be interesting...
 
M
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Irene Prevedello [mailto:irene.prevedello at agoradigitale.org] 
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 3:42 AM
To: Jeremy Malcolm
Cc: Luca Nicotra; michael gurstein; izumi at anr.org
Subject: Re: Re: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion


Dear Jeremy,
 
.... 
 
Anyway, we have some new information about the meeting. You'll find it at
the end of the mail.

Best,
Irene
Team Agorà Digitale



New World 2.0: Concretising the Internet of the future




Paris – 20 & 21 Octobre 2011




PROGRAMME






Thursday 20 Octobre




18.00 – 19.30 : Panel-discussion

The Public Space of the 21st century: does the Internet safeguard political
democracy?






Friday 21 Octobre




8.30-9.00: welcome of participants

Conference Center Pierre Mendès-France, Ministry of economy, finances and
industry




9.00 – 9.30: Opening.




9.30-11.00: Plenary session 1

Innovation: networks’ friend or foe?




11.00 -11.30: break / networking / bilateral meetings.




11.30-13.00: Plenary session 2

Reconciling the Internet business model and respect for privacy?





13.00-14.30 : Luncheon.

Conference Center Pierre Mendès-France





14.30-16.00: Plenary session 3

All against digital divides: the Internet for all.




16.00-16.30: Conclusion




17.00-18.30: Restricted session (all ministers and some entrepreneurs)

What agenda for network security?

Hôtel des Ministres


19.00 : Venture Capital night, in partnership with the « Camping » and « Biz
Park » projects.
Hôtel des Ministres

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/c728e7ec/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, 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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 15:15:16 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 12:15:16 -0700
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <CADQ+WoA651YGSOgU3G_-z--4o4nLki0M2ZgNYxSJiZfgEreXfw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56F47799B74242179D124FB8AB593DC3@acer6e40e97492>

Hmmm... So the "1 per cent" are going to have a cozy chat on "the Internet
and Democracy" and "Internet for all"... That should reassure us all...
 
M

-----Original Message-----
From: Irene Prevedello [mailto:irene.prevedello at agoradigitale.org] 
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2011 3:42 AM
To: Jeremy Malcolm
Cc: Luca Nicotra; michael gurstein; izumi at anr.org
Subject: Re: Re: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion


Dear Jeremy,

...
 
 Anyway, we have some new information about the meeting. You'll find it at
the end of the mail.

Best,
Irene
Team Agorà Digitale



New World 2.0: Concretising the Internet of the future




Paris – 20 & 21 Octobre 2011




PROGRAMME






Thursday 20 Octobre




18.00 – 19.30 : Panel-discussion

The Public Space of the 21st century: does the Internet safeguard political
democracy?






Friday 21 Octobre




8.30-9.00: welcome of participants

Conference Center Pierre Mendès-France, Ministry of economy, finances and
industry




9.00 – 9.30: Opening.




9.30-11.00: Plenary session 1

Innovation: networks’ friend or foe?




11.00 -11.30: break / networking / bilateral meetings.




11.30-13.00: Plenary session 2

Reconciling the Internet business model and respect for privacy?





13.00-14.30 : Luncheon.

Conference Center Pierre Mendès-France





14.30-16.00: Plenary session 3

All against digital divides: the Internet for all.




16.00-16.30: Conclusion




17.00-18.30: Restricted session (all ministers and some entrepreneurs)

What agenda for network security?

Hôtel des Ministres


19.00 : Venture Capital night, in partnership with the « Camping » and « Biz
Park » projects.
Hôtel des Ministres

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/f34ea815/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, 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


From matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at  Fri Oct  7 15:59:01 2011
From: matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at (Matthias C. Kettemann)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 21:59:01 +0200
Subject: [governance] CfP - Workshop on "Legal Aspects of IG" at the
 IRIS2012, Salzburg, 23-25 Feb 2012
In-Reply-To: <56F47799B74242179D124FB8AB593DC3@acer6e40e97492>
References: <56F47799B74242179D124FB8AB593DC3@acer6e40e97492>
Message-ID: <4E8F5A05.5040802@uni-graz.at>

(sorry for cross-posting) (please distribute widely)

Dear all,

please find enclosed (and below) a call for papers for an exciting 
workshop on "Legal Aspects of Internet Governance" at the IRIS 2012 in 
Salzburg, Austria, 23-25 February 2012.


*Workshop "Legal Aspects of Internet Governance"
Call for Papers
*
Internet governance is often defined as the development and application 
of principles, norms, rules, decision-making procedures, and programmes 
that shape the evolution and use of the Internet. This definition 
encompasses norms of a legal character, as well as soft law and code and 
various combinations thereof. While this wide understanding potentially 
includes most aspects of IT law, the present workshop aims to address a 
variety of legal issues related to the governance of core elements of 
the Internet, including its technical architecture and institutions in a 
global context, and the impact of the recent surge of declarations of 
rights and principles by different stakeholders.


October 31st, 2011 	Abstract submission (300-500 characters)
January 10th, 2012 	Camera-ready papers to be published in the 
conference proceedings
23-25 February 2012 (workshop date TBD) 	Workshop to be held during 
International Legal Informatics Symposium (IRIS) in Salzburg, Austria



Suggested content areas include, but are not limited to

  * the institutional framework for Internet governance (e.g. related to
    ICANN, IGF, etc. and reforms thereof);
  * public international law (including international human rights law)
    and Internet Governance;
  * international domain name law (including new top level domains);
  * legal issues regarding IP addresses; and
  * the impact and future of declarations of rights and principles on
    Internet Governance.


Conference

The International Legal Informatics Symposium (IRIS) will take place at 
the Law Faculty of the University of Salzburg from 23-25 February 2012. 
Already being in its 15th year, IRIS has been established as the largest 
and most important academic conference on computers and law in Austria 
and Central Europe. Conference and workshop participation is free of 
charge.

Language

The workshop’s working language is English, but the submission of papers 
in German is encouraged, provided that the paper is presented in English 
during the workshop. Most of the remaining conference is held in German, 
but an increasing number of workshops is offered in English.

Abstract submission

Abstracts (300-500 characters) should be submitted to 
http://irisj.eu/iris2012/SubmitAbstract.php
In addition, an email to one of the co-chairs would be much appreciated.

Publication

Accepted papers will be published in the conference proceedings of the 
15th IRIS symposium, to be available both electronically and in paper. 
Available formats are abstracts (2 pages), short papers (4 pages) or 
full papers (8 pages).

Workshop chairs

Dr. Tobias Mahler, LL.M., Norwegian Research Center for Computers and 
Law, University of Oslo, Norway
tobias.mahler at jus.uio.no <mailto:tobias.mahler at jus.uio.no>

Mag. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M., Institute of International Law and 
International Relations, University of Graz, Austria 
matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at <mailto:matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at>

--

Mag. iur. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard)
Teaching and Research Fellow

Institute of International Law and International Relations
University of Graz

Universitätsstraße 15/A4, 8010 Graz, Austria

T | +43 316 380 6711 (office)
M | +43 676 701 7175 (mobile)
F | +43 316 380 9455
E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/1985a579/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: CFP IG Workshop Salzburg 2012.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 149499 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/1985a579/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From gpaque at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 17:59:00 2011
From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque)
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 17:29:00 -0430
Subject: [governance] IGF output and continuation Workshop 67
 E-participation
In-Reply-To: <CALCecM-YcES1nPxO3Tq88Ft9Eh0TYZX-MmWKGHfGzrfu4wxufw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALCecM-YcES1nPxO3Tq88Ft9Eh0TYZX-MmWKGHfGzrfu4wxufw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALCecM8eoA+nDskqwtU2U9Lp9PZk6sCXLaFpbLTaiRUqZaoPSQ@mail.gmail.com>

Ginger (Virginia) Paque
Diplo Foundation
www.diplomacy.edu/ig
VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu

*Join the Diplo community IG discussions: www.diplointernetgovernance.org*


Did I hear you say you wanted some output from the IGF process? Please help
us continue the discussion started in Kenya...

The IGF Kenya 2011 Workshop 67 E-participation Principles
(
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=WSProposals2011View&wspid=67with
background paper
http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/components/com_chronocontact/uploads/WSProposals2011/20110922060910_WS%2016%20E-Participation%20Background.doc)
produced a first draft of a set of principles for e-participation,
particularly in reference to multistakeholder global policy processes as a
concrete output of the workshop. This was produced in collaborative editing
with *in situ* and remote attendees, all 'e-participants'.

The discussion draft produced using iEtherpad ( iEtherpad.com ) during the
workshop itself can be viewed at:
http://diplo.ietherpad.com/ep/pad/view/ro.6Uq9$cCZ/rev.4000

A draft of the principles was drawn up based on that discussion, and is now
open for comment at
http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/

Please visit the collaborative discussion page, to make your comments on any
one of the sections

   1. Inclusiveness (1) <http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/?p=1>
   2. Equality of participation
(0)<http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/?p=10>
   3. Scale and stability
(0)<http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/?p=13>
   4. Capacity building (0)<http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/?p=16>
   5. Providing platforms
(0)<http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/?p=18>
   6. A case study: E-participation at the heart of the IGF
(0)<http://discuss.diplomacy.edu/e-participation/?p=20>

by clicking on the section name in the Table of Contents. You can then make
a comment on any one of the principles on that page, by clicking on the
succession icon. You can review other comments at the same time, and reply
or build on another comment as well.

After the draft is open for discussion for at least 30 days, and all points
appear to be clarified, a second draft will be proposed for further comment.


We look forward to your contributions. If you have any questions or
suggestions, do not hesitate to contact me at VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu

E-participate! :)

Regards,
Ginger






Ginger (Virginia) Paque
Diplo Foundation
www.diplomacy.edu/ig
VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu

*Join the Diplo community IG discussions: www.diplointernetgovernance.org*



On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Virginia Paque <virginiap at diplomacy.edu>wrote:

> Dear friends,
> I would like to thank you sincerely for your participation on the
> panel of WS 67 for e-participation principles. You formed a great
> team, and delivered a wonderful presentation and project.
>
> All of the feedback I have received has been very positive.  As you
> saw, the iEtherpad document progressed amazingly well already during
> the workshop (diplo.ietherpad.com/19).
>
> I am attaching the first draft of the principles, which is not the
> complete document, of course. I will also send the Workshop report
> next week for your review before I send it it.
>
> We will continue discussions and development of the principles,
> guidelines and discussion, online, in the coming weeks. I will send
> more details after we are all home from Nairobi and a bit rested.
>
> Sala, Nicolas, we missed you, but we know timing was complicated.
>
> If you have any questions or comments, please reply all to this email.
> If you do not want to continue to be copied on the emails, please let
> me know.
>
> With appreciation and warm thanks,
> Gracias and saludos,
> Ginger
>
> Ginger (Virginia) Paque
> Diplo Foundation
> www.diplomacy.edu/ig
> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu
>
> Join the Diplo community IG discussions: www.diplointernetgovernance.org
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Virginia Paque <virginiap at diplomacy.edu>
> wrote:
> > Hi everyone!
> > We are well on our way, with an updated WS proposal at:
> >
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=WSProposals2011View&wspid=67
> >
> > We have quite an amazing panel:
> >
> > Raquel Gatto (moderator), Brazilian Network Information Center –
> > NIC.br and IGF Remote Participation working group
> > Jorge Plano, ISOC Argentina Chapter & DC on Accessibility and Disability
> > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro, Pacific region
> > Nnenna Nwakanma, FOSSFA
> > Nicolas Caballero, IT Coordinator, Office of the President, Paraguay,
> > FLOSS specialist (remote presenter)
> > Sebastien Bachollet, ICANN Public Participation Committee
> > Tim Davies, Practical Participation, Dynamic Coalition on Youth and
> > Internet Governance, Oxford
> > Jeremy Malcolm, IGC, Consumer's International, Malasia/Australia (
> > presenting by video)
> > Markus Kummer, Vice-President, Public Policy, Internet Society (ISOC)
> > Jovan Kurbalija, DiploFoundation e-participation and e-diplomacy
> initiatives
> > Sheba Mohammid, Rapporteur, ICT Policy Specialist
> > Virginia Paque, Remote moderator, DiploFoundation
> >
> > You can see previous discussions below, but the main point is that our
> > rapporteur and moderator need your short statement of viewpoint -- a
> > summary of the main point and principle(s) you will propose in your
> > strict 2-minute introductory intervention. This is also a good way to
> > make sure your most important point gets included in the report, so
> > take advantage!
> >
> > We will hold audience participants to the 2-minute limit as well. If
> > there is another point you think is important, please send an
> > appropriate question to this list. We will do our best to ask the
> > question at an appropriate time, giving you 2 minutes to address that
> > point as part of the discussion.
> >
> > I have attached our background paper. If you have any questions or
> > suggestions, please let us know! I will now turn the organizer job
> > over to your excellent moderator, Raquel Gatto. Those of you who don't
> > know each other, please introduce yourselves!
> >
> > This is an important panel, and we need each one of you. Thank you for
> > your collaboration!
> >
> > Warm wishes,
> > See you in Nairobi (in person or online)
> > Ginger
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi everyone..
> > I think that this is a very important panel, at a significant time in
> > IGF development. RP is finally finding its significance for global
> > policy processes, and we are ready to address the principles involved,
> > instead of the techniques.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Join the Diplo community IG discussions: www.diplointernetgovernance.org
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Virginia Paque <virginiap at diplomacy.edu>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> Please confirm that you have read all of our information (see below),
> and will be taking part in our Workshop 67 on E-participation principles at
> the IGF 2011 in Nairobi, 9-10:30 on the 3rd day, the 29th of September. You
> are expected to be in the room at least 15 minutes ahead of time to make
> sure we have coordinated well.
> >>
> >> I assume you have reviewed your bios online and have no changes to make.
> >>
> >> As we get close to the date, it is important that you each send a short
> note on the topic you intend to address in your 2-minute introduction (the
> 2-minute limit will be strictly enforced at the beginning and during the
> session). Please include the most important principle you think should be
> respected in remote participation, so we have a starting point for
> discussions. Please send these to 'reply all' as soon as possible, so
> Marilia, as moderator, can be well-prepared. We will not take time for
> complete introductions, since your bios are online. So it would be very
> helpful if you also send your name as you would like to be introduced, and
> the one most important thing you would like  Marilia to mention about you or
> your work.
> >>
> >> For example (not me, because I will be remote moderator, and will not be
> a panelist, but as an example):
> >>
> >> Panelist name and intro: Ginger Paque from DiploFoundation, an original
> founding member of the IGF remote participation working group.
> >> Suggested Principle: Remote Participation should be readily available
> and accessible even to those who have low bandwidth options.
> >>
> >> I have pasted below some panelist guidelines for your review: remember
> that the idea of our panel is to have the participants--especially the
> remote participants--express their views. This is about participation, not
> presentations. We would like to have a set of discussed guidelines as an
> output for our report.
> >>
> >> Here are some links on objectives, goals and strategies for Remote
> Participation that you might find interesting as you prepare:
> >> https://meetings.icann.org/remote-participation
> >> http://meetings.apnic.net/30/remote/tools (some 'guidelines at the
> bottom')
> >> https://www.arin.net/participate/meetings/remote_aup.html
> >>
> >> You will note that these address tech and organizational guidelines for
> the most part. We want to move beyond that to a few, important, overarching
> principles, such as (not these, these are just quick examples):
> >>
> >> Remote Participation should be readily available and accessible even to
> those who have low bandwidth options, for all global policy meetings.
> >> Global policy and other meetings should actively encourage and support
> remote participation from lesser heard voices as a priority for meeting
> organization.
> >>
> >> Please do some publicity for our workshop: we want to have a good remote
> participation, so that we can hear the views of those who need RP most of
> all!
> >>
> >> Suggestions welcome. Your response required. Thanks so much! This is an
> important workshop, and we appreciate your time and energy to support it.
> Immediately below I have pasted the panel guidelines, just in case you find
> it helpful. Below that is my previous email.
> >>
> >> We all need to hear from each of you as soon as possible! Gracias!
> >> Ginger
> >>
> >>
> >> Ginger (Virginia) Paque
> >> Diplo Foundation
> >> www.diplomacy.edu/ig
> >> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu
> >>
> >> Join the Diplo community IG discussions:
> www.diplointernetgovernance.org
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Virginia Paque <
> virginiap at diplomacy.edu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hello again,
> >>> Our workshop proposal has been updated, and you can see the current
> proposal below. Your bios are all online--please check to make sure they are
> correct.
> >>>
> >>> As you know, this will be a round table discussion, where the
> 'presenters' will be the participants, as our purpose is to gather input
> from all regions of the world, and all stakeholders. Marilia will moderate
> the session, and each of you will give a 2-minute maximum presentation of
> what you consider the most important principle about
> remote/online/e-participation. Ideally, you would sent these statements to
> the group, so we are familiar with each other's positions, and do not repeat
> them.
> >>>
> >>> The role of the panelists will be to be provocative, controversial and
> dynamic, with very short, precise interventions, with the goal of gathering
> a wide range of responses and reactions for further investigation. We do not
> seek consensus, rather a diversity of opinion. I will send guidelines for
> panelists for your 'reading pleasure', just as a reference.
> >>>
> >>> We are still waiting for confirmation from Mr. Kudric  [Representative
> from the Disability DC, or Mr. Todic (UN disability committee) (Serbia?)].
> We hope Jovan or Vlada will be able to communicate with him shortly.
> >>>
> >>> If you have any questions or doubts, please email, using 'reply all',
> so we can discuss.
> >>> Thank you very much for accepting a place on this workshop. I think it
> will be very productive, and allow us to move the discussions on
> e-participation from a 'technical level' to a policy and principle level.
> >>>
> >>> Workshop Proposals 2011
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Workshop Number: 67
> >>> Title: E-participation Principles
> >>> Status:
> >>> ACCEPTED
> >>> Concise Description:
> >>> The workshop will consist of a roundtable discussion, in order to
> ensure maximum interaction among participants. The issues will be framed as
> questions, in order to foster a more focused debate and to reach more
> concrete outcomes.
> >>> Building up on the positive experience of remote participation during
> IGF meetings, the workshop will explore two main topics:
> >>> a) The ways to strengthen online interaction among the members of the
> IGF community, in order to generate a continuous all-year debate, as
> proposed during the discussions that took place in CSTD WG on IGF
> improvement;
> >>> b) A strategy to raise awareness and foster the use of online channels
> for participation in other global meetings, with focus on the inclusion of
> developing countries in international policy-shaping as an underlying
> principle.
> >>>
> >>> The workshop will count on speakers from all stakeholder groups, not
> only because the diversity of views leads to creative and out-of-the-box
> suggestions, but also because improving e-/remote participation should be
> seen as a collective responsibility of all the members of the community.
> >>>
> >>> The round table discussion will have two parts, focussing on answering
> the following questions:
> >>> Part 1: Principles and global strategies:
> >>> What are the strategies to foster the use of channels for e-/remote
> participation by developing countries, least developed countries and remote
> areas?
> >>> How can we formulate a strategy to raise awareness and foster the use
> of online channels for participation in other global meetings, with focus on
> the inclusion of developing countries in international policy-shaping?
> >>> Can a set of principles and good practices be formulated to ensure the
> effective impact of e-/remote participants on policy-shaping process?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Part 2: Best practices and developing practices:
> >>>
> >>> How can the IGF community make use of online channels of communication
> more efficiently to remain in contact and make the IGF a process that
> develops throughout the year?
> >>> How can we carry out at least one of the IGF open consultations
> entirely online?
> >>> How can we foster the participation of remote speakers and speakers
> from hubs in workshops?
> >>> Which of the five broad IGF Themes or the Cross-Cutting Priorities does
> your workshop fall under?
> >>> Access and Diversity
> >>> Have you organized an IGF workshop before? Yes
> >>> If so, please provide the link to the report:
> >>>
> http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/chronocontact/?chronoformname=WSProposalsReports2010View&wspid=126
> >>> Provide the names and affiliations of the panellists you are planning
> to invite:
> >>>
> >>> Representative from the Disability DC, or Mr. Todic (UN disability
> committee) (Serbia?)
> >>> Marilia Maciel (moderator), Getulio Vargas Foundation, Brazil
> >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro, Pacific region
> >>> Nnenna Nwakanma, FOSSFA
> >>> Nicolas Caballero, IT Coordinator, Office of the President, Paraguay,
> FLOSS specialist
> >>> Jeremy Malcolm, IGC, Consumer's International, Malasia/Australia
> >>> Jovan Kurbalija, DiploFoundation e-participation and e-diplomacy
> initiatives
> >>> Virginia Paque, remote moderator, DiploFoundation
> >>>
> >>> Provide the name of the organizer(s) of the workshop and their
> affiliation to various stakeholder groups:
> >>> Virginia Paque
> >>> DiploFoundation (diverse in gender, region and stakeholder groups)
> >>> Remote Participation Working Group (diverse in gender, region and
> stakeholder groups)
> >>> Organization:DiploFoundation
> >>> Contact Person: Virginia Paque
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Ginger
> >>>
> >>> Ginger (Virginia) Paque
> >>> Diplo Foundation
> >>> www.diplomacy.edu/ig
> >>> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu
> >>>
> >>> Join the Diplo community IG discussions:
> www.diplointernetgovernance.org
> >>
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111007/560eb4eb/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Oct  7 22:14:43 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 14:14:43 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
	<4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi guys,

I edited my earlier comments, here is the revised version:



*Noting* that reference to the IBSA Multistakeholder meeting on Global
Internet Governance was restricted to public and private sector and civil
society in India, Brazil and South Africa although there has been some
notable contentions by
Nupef[1]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_ftn1>;


*Acknowledging* the advice given to the Internet Governance Caucus (IGC) by
one of the organisers of the IBSA meeting that invitations were sent to
diverse stakeholders and that proponents are desirous to solicit enhanced
cooperation;


*Noting* that the spirit of Global Internet Governance demands that any
discussions affecting the evolution of internet governance discussions
should involve the global internet community through the global internet
governance forums that are convened annually;


*Noting* the UN General Assembly Resolution
A/63/202[2]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_ftn2>emphasis
for facilitation of meaningful participation and called on the
Secretary General to provide a Report on enhanced cooperation;


*Noting* the United Nations Economic and Social Council’s Report of the
Secretary General on the Enhanced Cooperation on Public Policy issues
pertaining to the Internet
(E/2009/92*)[3]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_ftn3>;


*Acknowledging* that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there is
merit in improving institutional coordination as well as coordination among
all stakeholders at the regional, subregional and national levels, the IGC
believes that this does not justify the creation of an
institution[s1]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_msocom_1>
 ;


[Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote on the
issue – although we should be prepared for the results]

We the IGC hold the following views:-

[*It is ok to put a diverse representation of our views on the matter and we
all do not have to agree eg.*

* *

*Perspective 1*

*Perspective 2*

*Perspective 3*

*
*

*It is perfectly understandable not to share the same view on things as we
are from different contexts and perspectives. It is also ok to show where
and in what instances we are in agreement eg. An open and free internet,
meaningful participation even if we disagree on “methodologies”* ]


*Sala’s views*

(My personal views on the matter are that the greatest strength of the
Internet Governance Forum is that it is transparent, democratic and
multi-stakeholder and to create a single institution to manage global
internet processes to develop processes for internet at global level could
threaten vulnerable groups.  The architecture of the Internet where diverse
stakeholders have roles in managing different aspects makes “governance”
using traditional governance models a challenge and is where the two diverse
perspectives of “real law” and “cyber law” may never agree to meet and it is
an attempt in futility to try to get them to agree.


What should be done, in my view is to gather the philosophers to start
thinking of existing or new philosophical foundations that can address this
issue. Jean Jacques Rousseau who developed the social contract theory in the
18th Century clearly did not witness something like the global borderless
internet. Where jurisdictions differ on how they are to control and regulate
something so transcendently global and borderless.


To this day, you can name the few instances where governments are in
complete agreement on something and this is a testament to the diverse
contexts and notions of sovereignty and interests. In WGIG 2005 Report V. A.
36 recommended the “creation of new space for dialogue for all stakeholders
on an equal footing on all Internet governance related issues”. This has
been successful in my view and I acknowledge that people view success
differently as there are various yardsticks because people are different and
expectations clearly differ.


Clearly from observing the discussions on the list, it is clear that some
measure success in getting clear outcomes which can be executed. Some are
content to merely engage people in robust discussions etc. If one examines
all the institutions and stakeholders within the Internet Universe, we will
see that there is always room to improve and what processes currently exist
where we can address this.


Without a doubt, Internet governance discussions are on a crossroads. At the
same time, it is imperative that we examine and dialogue on the drivers and
motivations behind the IBSA. Should it justify the creation of a new entity
and institution?


 The United Nations Internet Governance Secretariat (“Secretariat”) already
exists and if the stakeholders within the IBSA feel that coordination can be
improved then it should communicate to the Secretariat what it feels could
be strengthened. In my view to bypass the Secretariat and lobby within the
United Nations General Assembly is to act in bad faith of the machinery that
is already available to us as members of the Internet Universe.


[I am not sure whether a Survey has been done ever on the matter, perhaps it
has, pardon my ignorance].


In UN meetings, only governments are given votes and in some instances there
are forced governments which are not elected etc. In having a forum like the
current IGF model people can have freedom of expression. The use of
“multilateral” goes against the grain of the core definition of Internet
Governance that was developed  in the WGIG 2005 report that the then UN
Secretary General commissioned which was subsequently endorsed by member
states of the UN.


Internet governance as defined by the WGIG 2005 Report “ 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”.


*Authentic enhanced cooperation* *should not* be regulated, it should be
encouraged.  The definition of Internet Governance in my view shows the
beauty and the delicate compromise where stakeholders acknowledge that their
roles and mandates clearly exist and that no one can take it away from them.
There is nothing to stop governments from continuing in their roles and
approaches to governance in their respective jurisdictions. Similarly with
the private and civil society there is nothing to stop them from carrying
out their usual business, responsibilities, mandates etc. This is what makes
the world go round!


The WGIG 2005 Report further reinforced the inclusiveness approach and to
shift the spotlight on a single spectrum, albeit powerful spectrum, is to
forever alter the “inclusiveness” approach. Did the Tunis Agenda mention
“multilateral”?  There are instances within the Internet Universe that wilkl
require multilateral approaches to issues such as cyber security for
instance. However, in terms of the broader framework of Internet Governance
everyone has their place.   In fact Part IV of the WGIG 2005 Report talks
about developing a common understanding of the roles of government, private
sector and civil society.


The use of “fragmentation of the internet”, “disjointed policy making”
within the IBSA needs to be substantiated by solid empirical evidence and
research so that in a transparent nature, the members of the internet
universe can decide whether and how improvements should be made. There
should also be substantive discussions on whether existing procedures and
processes have been exhausted to address these issues.


In terms of encouraging access and participation in developing worlds, I see
it as the responsibility of people from within the regions that they are
respectively from to empower and enlighten their people to participate in
policy processes. If they are denied the opportunity to participate and
participate meaningful, then we have a serious problem but until then, we
should seek to support the multi-stakeholder model. I welcome the call for
A/63/202 for member states and UN members to allocate resources for
meaningful participation. I also welcome moves by the Diplo Community to
encourage e participation in policy processes. Institutions like ICANN are
inclusive in their approach to receiving feedbacks from the all stakeholders
through their diverse processes. Institutions like the ITU only permit
governments and paying members such as Telcos and ISPs to participate in
their processes. This is not a criticism of ITU nor is it praise for ICANN
but a mere observation that all institutions have their place and mandates
and together the internet universe and its stakeholders can work together to
encourage and open and free internet.


If for some reason, the developing world feels that they are not given the
opportunity to have their say, then they should speak up and move into
positions where they can contribute and speak up for their communities.  We
need to encourage catalysts within regions to work closely with the United
Nations Internet Governance Secretariat Remote Participation team and
Network Operator Groups (NOGs), Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and other
stakeholders within the region to ensure cohesive participation for all.
This should be an enhancement of process which is something that the
Coordinators can lobby and push for in a strategic coherent manner. )





------------------------------

[1]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_ftnref1>
http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84

[2]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_ftnref2>
http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/482/91/PDF/N0848291.pdf?OpenElement

[3]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_ftnref3>
http://www.unctad.org/en/docs/e2009d92_en.pdf
  ------------------------------

 [s1]<file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala's%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_msoanchor_1>This
is where the survey will be useful (white monkey?)

On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 1:41 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> I think we can and should do better. I recall this part of Nupef's
> statement:
>
> "Nupef recognizes that the IBSA recommendations might be an interesting
> starting point for a discussion if reformulated and improved, not only
> in its content but also in the process of its further development,
> including a wider range of civil society voices in an open,
> participatory and transparent process."
>
> This is what I think we should be proactively doing. What could be
> improved, changed (in what direction), discarded and so on? Nupef is
> trying to do its part in a dialogue with the BR gov (unfortunately in
> pt_br so far). I suspect the SA CS is trying to do the same, and so are
> our CS fellows from India.
>
> Time is quite short, though.
>
> frt rgds
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 10/07/2011 07:15 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
> > So we're commenting on the summary?
> >
> > Perhaps we should just endorse the Nupef's statement
> > <http://www.nupef.org.br/?q=node/84> ?
> >
> > Adam
> >
> >
> >
> >> The IBSA proposal, in some form, will be issued at the upcoming Summit
> >> on 18-19 October.  This leaves us about a week if we want to issue a
> >> statement ahead of that Summit with our input on the proposal.
> >>
> >> Should we do this?
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Dr 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
> >>
> >> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer
> >> groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only
> >> independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over
> >> 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful
> >> international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> >> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>www.consumersinternational.org
> >> <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>Twitter @ConsumersInt
> >>
> >> Read our <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>
> >> email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.
> >>
> >>
> >> Content-Type: application/pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s"
> >> Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s"
> >> Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
> >>
> >> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:smime 37.p7s (    /    ) (0053DD04)
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111008/f1167923/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Sat Oct  8 01:46:17 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 06:46:17 +0100
Subject: [governance] Congratulations to Nobel Peace Prize Recipients!
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeav_50NeawZ3K477+O6ViiFp2nA+fNRocHpuu=TM=qoEbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiD_ySP30B8kcPpvUCzdOC-5kzj+3=n6BJayAz7zAtrawg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM29qGbybFWJP1bhDr5OeQJQPgoQ8egxsjALV7fEOHX=DcUSCg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALLeeav_50NeawZ3K477+O6ViiFp2nA+fNRocHpuu=TM=qoEbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeavc+8-0RkSYDHxK=F2LJcHkDBrQ_Fh+nWeuqE--KP4aGA@mail.gmail.com>

Good notes by Nyangkwe!

What do we stand for?

On 7 Oct 2011 11:29, "Nyangkwe Agien Aaron" <nyangkweagien at gmail.com> wrote:

Congratualtions to the winners.
I'll rcommend that they stay in the foot steps of Maathai Waangari and
not be stooges of the West as Desmond Tutu, Koffi Annan and Wole
Soyinka have proven if we go by their pronouncements on events in
Ivory Cooast and Libya.

Obama won the peace prize and encouraged the war in Ivory Coast and
Libya while Ellen Johnson encouraged the war in Côte d'Ivoire and
Libya before winning the prize. A paradox?

Aaron


On 10/7/11, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro

<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> To the Women who received the Nobel Peace Prize and ...
>    -
>
>
> The Nobel Peace Prize 2011Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Leymah Gbowee, Tawakkul

> Karman
> The Nobel Peace Prize
> 2011<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Ellen
> Johnson
> Sirleaf<http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#
>Leymah
> Gbowee
> <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>Tawakkul
> Karman <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/#>
> [image: Ellen Johnson
> Sirleaf]<
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/johnson_sirleaf.html
>

> Photo: A. Cruz/ABr. Creative Commons License Attr. 2.5 Brazil
> [image: Leymah
> Gbowee]<
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/gbowee.html>

> Photo: Michael Angelo for Wonderland
> [image: Tawakkul
> Karman]<
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2011/karman.html>

> Photo: Ahmed Jadallah/Scanpix
> Ellen Johnson Sirleaf
> Leymah Gbowee
> Tawakkul Karman
>
> --
> S...
--
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist-OutCome Mapper
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscrib...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111008/adcff625/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, 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


From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 05:18:47 2011
From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE)
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 10:18:47 +0100
Subject: [governance] Final version open letter to e-G20 re: Civil
 Society Inclusion/non-Inclusion
In-Reply-To: <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
References: <EE997DB1A1444C47833396DBFEA9AE3A@acer6e40e97492>
 <642B917C-5716-482B-A842-B04B620EB0E8@ciroap.org> <CA+YNoKgy=FiR1higTWs3z5ft+nSWR-JSCwRhOBq8Nfhox9xbbA@mail.gmail.com>
 <A016B9A7-38B6-44F2-A4DB-C8A2B9188669@ciroap.org> <4E8DC8DD.3050507@itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <CAPcSPKUsZAHZB084K2_n8yw2oXqfHYeYP0xxG9FkJpPbG_j16w@mail.gmail.com>

Hello
I support much Parminder. Why a minority, however powerful it may be, must
make decisions without inquiring the opinions of others? Why would you want
one thing and its opposite? If we are to evolve the concept of democracy, we
must stay in that sense.

Baudouin

2011/10/6 parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>

> **
> I am not happy with the IGC just calling for civil society inclusion. It is
> not enough if 20 largest governments along with largely their industry take
> important Internet related decisions, even if they include respective civil
> societies (or even the broader global civil society) . Internet is global,
> and its major decisions should be taken by a globally representative forum.
> For this reason, whenever we write such letters for including civil society
> in select country confabulations, we should also ask for all countries to
> be included. For this purpose appropriate institutional forms must be
> evolved.
>
> I have no basic objection to some country meeting on select issues and
> discussing things, However, this kind of thing happening in the context of a
> deep global democratic deficit in IG area, and to the extent such meeting
> perpetuate this democratic deficit, is what is the problem. We must have a
> clear view on this 'problem'.
>
> Otherwise I find the letter quite good.
>
> Can we inquire with the drafters of the letter if we can add a sentence on
> non inclusion of all countries in such 'global' IG discussions as we call
> for inclusion of the civil society.
>
> parminder
>
>
>
> On Thursday 06 October 2011 06:32 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
>
>  On 06/10/2011, at 12:39 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote:
>
> given the limited info and also time, could we start a consensus call with
> some conditional
> element?
> I mean we ask general support for joining this open letter within IGC as
> consensus call and also ask the organizer to modify the wording that
> reflects the
> latest and accurate info?
>
> and maybe the details can be left to us, co-coordinators if IGC also
> agrees.
>
>
>  That's a good plan; members please express your views on whether we
> should subscribe to this open letter, subject to minor editing which we will
> explore in the meantime.  Izumi and I will assess the IGC's position by COB
> tomorrow.
>
>  --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> 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, 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
>
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
ACADEMIE DES TIC
FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
At-Large Member
NCSG Member

email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
         baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
tél:+243998983491
skype:b.schombe
wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111008/b75167d0/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 20:38:37 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 12:38:37 +1200
Subject: [governance] Syria
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi! I was reading the CKO daily and learnt about how citizen journalists
were being hunted down through Facebook. Is there anyone from Syria on this
list. I would be interested. I am also sorry to hear of the killings and
unrest: http://paper.li/bevilwooding#!politics

It was also interesting to see Russia and China exercise their vetoes.

Warm Regards,
-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111009/e565e7d2/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 20:40:26 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 12:40:26 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>

The vetoes are in failed Security Council Resolution SC/10403

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Hi! I was reading the CKO daily and learnt about how citizen journalists
> were being hunted down through Facebook. Is there anyone from Syria on this
> list. I would be interested. I am also sorry to hear of the killings and
> unrest: http://paper.li/bevilwooding#!politics
>
> It was also interesting to see Russia and China exercise their vetoes.
>
> Warm Regards,
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111009/6e37aac1/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sat Oct  8 21:40:10 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 13:40:10 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>

Some of you may recall that one of things that was discussed at the PrIGF
was citizen journalism. There are some interesting developments as far as
citizen journalism in Syria is concerned. Apparently, there are citizens who
are being hunted down via via facebook. Read about how citizen protesters
are turning to facebook to expose spies. The UN Human Rights office reports
deaths to have climbed to the 2900 mark, what is even more interesting is
the vetoes by the Chinese and Russian Federation.(See:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39955&Cr=syria&Cr1 )

The failed Security Resolution: SC/10403 due to the vetoes by China and
Russia. I first saw this story on the CKO daily which you can subscribe to:
http://paper.li/bevilwooding#!politics. [You can read the World/Politics
column]

Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is the
message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound. The
abstentions are notable. Europe is fortunate in most regards as you have in
my view a balanced approach to issues where everyone has a role but there
are countries such as Syria and many others who struggle with issues such as
privacy, freedom of speech etc. It is interesting to observe the evolution
of this phenomena of citizen journalism and the diverse approaches that
governments are responding to the situation whether it is the United
Kingdom, Iran or Syria.
<http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39955&Cr=syria&Cr1>
*Death toll from Syrian violence tops 2,900, UN human rights office
says<http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=39955&Cr=syria&Cr1>
*
www.un.org
The death toll from months of violent clashes between Syrian Government
forces a...See More

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> The vetoes are in failed Security Council Resolution SC/10403
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi! I was reading the CKO daily and learnt about how citizen journalists
>> were being hunted down through Facebook. Is there anyone from Syria on this
>> list. I would be interested. I am also sorry to hear of the killings and
>> unrest: http://paper.li/bevilwooding#!politics
>>
>> It was also interesting to see Russia and China exercise their vetoes.
>>
>> Warm Regards,
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111009/201110f6/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Sun Oct  9 05:48:50 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 11:48:50 +0200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>

On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is the message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.

including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN sanctions on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was busy hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to develop global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse trading over all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting deals on issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet speech, TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and other geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…

Bill
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111009/50ff2428/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, 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


From nhklein at gmx.net  Sun Oct  9 06:20:25 2011
From: nhklein at gmx.net (nhklein)
Date: Sun, 09 Oct 2011 17:20:25 +0700
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com> <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4E917569.6090703@gmx.net>

On 10/09/2011 04:48 PM, William Drake wrote:
> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is 
>> the message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
>
> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN 
> sanctions on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government 
> there was busy hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new 
> UN body to develop global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee 
> the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of 
> the Internet, including global standards setting."  Then we can have 
> intergovernmental horse trading over all aspects of global IG with 
> Russia, China, et al linking voting deals on issues like their 
> proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet speech, TLDs, address 
> assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and other 
> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…
>
> Bill

And some more interesting reading on surveillance by a government - this 
time from Germany - and how it even goes against the high Constitutional 
Court of the same country:

http://ccc.de/en/updates/2011/staatstrojaner


Norbert Klein

-- 
A while ago, I started a new blog:

...thinking it over... after 21 years in Cambodia
http://www.thinking21.org/

continuing to share reports and comments from Cambodia.

Norbert Klein
nhklein at gmx.net
Phnom Penh / Cambodia


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111009/e8653b73/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 06:51:44 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 22:51:44 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <4E917569.6090703@gmx.net>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
	<4E917569.6090703@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAHPLKMnq8ZSKpptGxd8x+Y8KFGSPKW6tSjjo4A100+hA@mail.gmail.com>

>
> And some more interesting reading on surveillance by a government - this
> time from Germany - and how it even goes against the high Constitutional
> Court of the same country:
>
> http://ccc.de/en/updates/2011/staatstrojaner
>


>
> Norbert Klein
>
>
 This raises interesting discussions on whether in our attempt to see a
perfected processes and streams of processes which drives us
to advocate for an institution to oversee internet governance policy
formulation to encourage global participation is worth the threat to
vulnerable groups. In the macro view of things, will it be a price that we
would be willing to pay. What are other alternatives to improving
processes and efficiency? If as in the Syrian example, nations have taken
their positions on the matter - in diplomatic speak, even an
abstention is a "message" in itself and in the recent example where the
Executive Arm in Germany if the contents of the website that
Norbert sent are authentic and true defies constitutional principles, how
are the rights of the vulnerable protected?

Interestingly we can hypothesise and predict/forecast the future by using
existing jurisprudence and studying behaviour through signals such as the
vetoing of the Security Resolution, the manner in which the UK reacted to
the riots, the alleged behaviour of the German
Police etc. In the balance of things, particularly rights and
responsibilities, there are no easy answers.

Sala




-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111009/61ac82ce/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, 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


From andrea at digitalpolicy.it  Sun Oct  9 07:04:22 2011
From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 13:04:22 +0200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>

Bill,

but doesn't this kind of horse trading already take place anyway, now
that the Internet is seen as a strategic component of geopolitical
strategies by the "heavy weights" (and increasingly, by mid- and light
weights, too)?

Ciao,

Andrea (speaking on a personal basis)

On 10/9/11, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is the
>> message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
>
> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN sanctions
> on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was busy
> hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to develop
> global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible
> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global
> standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse trading over
> all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting deals on
> issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet speech,
> TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and other
> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…
>
> Bill
____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Sun Oct  9 07:49:06 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2011 13:49:06 +0200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com> <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch> <CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <743874B8-0E4A-4A5A-A95C-084BA9BD658E@uzh.ch>

Hi Andrea

On Oct 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:

> Bill,
> 
> but doesn't this kind of horse trading already take place anyway, now
> that the Internet is seen as a strategic component of geopolitical
> strategies by the "heavy weights" (and increasingly, by mid- and light
> weights, too)?

Not sure, I guess it would depend how we specify what we're talking about.  Can you give me examples of governments engaging in geopolitical horse trading across distinct issue-areas in ways that have impacted global IG, like votes on sanctions or agricultural trade or whatever being traded for votes on Internet names, numbers, standards, etc?  And whether or not we can identify some, the next question is, would centralizing global IG under a UN intergovernmental body increase the propensity to engage in this, reduce it, or have no impact either way?  I believe it would increase it significantly, but would be interested in hearing the counter-argument.

Cheers,

Bill 

> 
> 
> On 10/9/11, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
>> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>> 
>>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is the
>>> message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
>> 
>> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN sanctions
>> on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was busy
>> hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to develop
>> global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible
>> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global
>> standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse trading over
>> all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting deals on
>> issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet speech,
>> TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and other
>> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…
>> 
>> Bill
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 21:03:32 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:03:32 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <743874B8-0E4A-4A5A-A95C-084BA9BD658E@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
	<CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<743874B8-0E4A-4A5A-A95C-084BA9BD658E@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCG9cjTvqTC3eu+o91YL5wKY13FiBOZnEtOa9NmoMZ+TQ@mail.gmail.com>

More interesting developments in Syria as countries are warned by the Syrian
Government:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/world/middleeast/syria-warns-countries-not-to-recognize-opposition.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto

On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 11:49 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

> Hi Andrea
>
> On Oct 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>
> > Bill,
> >
> > but doesn't this kind of horse trading already take place anyway, now
> > that the Internet is seen as a strategic component of geopolitical
> > strategies by the "heavy weights" (and increasingly, by mid- and light
> > weights, too)?
>
> Not sure, I guess it would depend how we specify what we're talking about.
>  Can you give me examples of governments engaging in geopolitical horse
> trading across distinct issue-areas in ways that have impacted global IG,
> like votes on sanctions or agricultural trade or whatever being traded for
> votes on Internet names, numbers, standards, etc?  And whether or not we can
> identify some, the next question is, would centralizing global IG under a UN
> intergovernmental body increase the propensity to engage in this, reduce it,
> or have no impact either way?  I believe it would increase it significantly,
> but would be interested in hearing the counter-argument.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
> >
> >
> > On 10/9/11, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> >> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> >>
> >>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is
> the
> >>> message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
> >>
> >> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN
> sanctions
> >> on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was busy
> >> hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to
> develop
> >> global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies
> responsible
> >> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including
> global
> >> standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse trading
> over
> >> all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting deals
> on
> >> issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet
> speech,
> >> TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and
> other
> >> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…
> >>
> >> Bill
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/0336f8ed/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 21:09:28 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:09:28 +1200
Subject: [governance] [US reliance on private contractors is seeing a
 sinister focus on surveillance of citizens instead of defence against
 cyber attack]
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBp3r25bip31afOO99RD5qEuVrSwg8ihnd6a5b+A16wfg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Should we be surprised?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/oct/09/virtual-secret-state-military-industrial

How different is this from when it is sponsored by the State as in the case
of the allegations against the German Police's use of "Trojans" ?

Surveillance - Private Contractors or State sponsored

When is it justified? What are the limits?

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/4a4522f6/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 21:38:47 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:38:47 +1200
Subject: [governance] Free Speech
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBWq9mjCuxG8y+csS9qXQs--sA8m4Cv94tMhY3z+aA3BA@mail.gmail.com>

This is a reminder to never take "Free Speech" for granted. There are people
in parts of the world who to this day get lashed for doing so.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/09/iranian-lashed-insult-ahmadinejad?CMP=twt_fd

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/1096a6a6/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Sun Oct  9 21:52:39 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:52:39 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiCG9cjTvqTC3eu+o91YL5wKY13FiBOZnEtOa9NmoMZ+TQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
	<CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<743874B8-0E4A-4A5A-A95C-084BA9BD658E@uzh.ch>
	<CAJwbTiCG9cjTvqTC3eu+o91YL5wKY13FiBOZnEtOa9NmoMZ+TQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDgYqt0FS+YmQBkZ2Y4aBf09ycXLXD1GQUAcA-yUm+6xg@mail.gmail.com>

I discovered an interesting Blog by a Professor who specialises in Middle
East Studies on the failed Resolution:

http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12401&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Syriacomment+%28Syria+Comment%29

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> More interesting developments in Syria as countries are warned by the
> Syrian Government:
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/world/middleeast/syria-warns-countries-not-to-recognize-opposition.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
>
> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 11:49 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrea
>>
>> On Oct 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>
>> > Bill,
>> >
>> > but doesn't this kind of horse trading already take place anyway, now
>> > that the Internet is seen as a strategic component of geopolitical
>> > strategies by the "heavy weights" (and increasingly, by mid- and light
>> > weights, too)?
>>
>> Not sure, I guess it would depend how we specify what we're talking about.
>>  Can you give me examples of governments engaging in geopolitical horse
>> trading across distinct issue-areas in ways that have impacted global IG,
>> like votes on sanctions or agricultural trade or whatever being traded for
>> votes on Internet names, numbers, standards, etc?  And whether or not we can
>> identify some, the next question is, would centralizing global IG under a UN
>> intergovernmental body increase the propensity to engage in this, reduce it,
>> or have no impact either way?  I believe it would increase it significantly,
>> but would be interested in hearing the counter-argument.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > On 10/9/11, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
>> >> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is
>> the
>> >>> message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
>> >>
>> >> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN
>> sanctions
>> >> on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was busy
>> >> hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to
>> develop
>> >> global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies
>> responsible
>> >> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including
>> global
>> >> standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse trading
>> over
>> >> all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting deals
>> on
>> >> issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet
>> speech,
>> >> TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and
>> other
>> >> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open
>> Internet…
>> >>
>> >> Bill
>> > ____________________________________________________________
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/66952ee3/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, 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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 00:57:07 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 07:57:07 +0300
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiDgYqt0FS+YmQBkZ2Y4aBf09ycXLXD1GQUAcA-yUm+6xg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
 <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch> <CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <743874B8-0E4A-4A5A-A95C-084BA9BD658E@uzh.ch> <CAJwbTiCG9cjTvqTC3eu+o91YL5wKY13FiBOZnEtOa9NmoMZ+TQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJwbTiDgYqt0FS+YmQBkZ2Y4aBf09ycXLXD1GQUAcA-yUm+6xg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxi3DE85Oa7FqfSvrKD43j+8ej2VRvnP+YowLT5x8Q5+hQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> I discovered an interesting Blog by a Professor who specialises in Middle
> East Studies on the failed Resolution:
> http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12401&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Syriacomment+%28Syria+Comment%29


To me this is more evidence that Bill is correct that
intergovernmental-ism is not the way forward in IG, and that CS
(including the IGC) should resist at every opportunity.

-- 
Cheers,

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

>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> More interesting developments in Syria as countries are warned by the
>> Syrian Government:
>>
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/world/middleeast/syria-warns-countries-not-to-recognize-opposition.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
>> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 11:49 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Andrea
>>>
>>> On Oct 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
>>>
>>> > Bill,
>>> >
>>> > but doesn't this kind of horse trading already take place anyway, now
>>> > that the Internet is seen as a strategic component of geopolitical
>>> > strategies by the "heavy weights" (and increasingly, by mid- and light
>>> > weights, too)?
>>>
>>> Not sure, I guess it would depend how we specify what we're talking
>>> about.  Can you give me examples of governments engaging in geopolitical
>>> horse trading across distinct issue-areas in ways that have impacted global
>>> IG, like votes on sanctions or agricultural trade or whatever being traded
>>> for votes on Internet names, numbers, standards, etc?  And whether or not we
>>> can identify some, the next question is, would centralizing global IG under
>>> a UN intergovernmental body increase the propensity to engage in this,
>>> reduce it, or have no impact either way?  I believe it would increase it
>>> significantly, but would be interested in hearing the counter-argument.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 10/9/11, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
>>> >> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is
>>> >>> the
>>> >>> message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
>>> >>
>>> >> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN
>>> >> sanctions
>>> >> on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was
>>> >> busy
>>> >> hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to
>>> >> develop
>>> >> global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies
>>> >> responsible
>>> >> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including
>>> >> global
>>> >> standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse trading
>>> >> over
>>> >> all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting
>>> >> deals on
>>> >> issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet
>>> >> speech,
>>> >> TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and
>>> >> other
>>> >> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open
>>> >> Internet…
>>> >>
>>> >> Bill
>>> > ____________________________________________________________
>>> > 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
>>> >
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 00:59:48 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:59:48 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxi3DE85Oa7FqfSvrKD43j+8ej2VRvnP+YowLT5x8Q5+hQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
	<CAOLD2+ZcTuAHmhNcaXXmiiwEb-ykPK_b=ZzHmzYD-d+NV=4fvw@mail.gmail.com>
	<743874B8-0E4A-4A5A-A95C-084BA9BD658E@uzh.ch>
	<CAJwbTiCG9cjTvqTC3eu+o91YL5wKY13FiBOZnEtOa9NmoMZ+TQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiDgYqt0FS+YmQBkZ2Y4aBf09ycXLXD1GQUAcA-yUm+6xg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACAaNxi3DE85Oa7FqfSvrKD43j+8ej2VRvnP+YowLT5x8Q5+hQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAyRO4oAf85ptgi_D-MkXWNuJiCj+ijNZk9-SP1K1OxEA@mail.gmail.com>

Precisely why it is imperative that global civil society must be seen to
take a stance.

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:57 PM, McTim <dogwallah at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I discovered an interesting Blog by a Professor who specialises in Middle
> > East Studies on the failed Resolution:
> >
> http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/?p=12401&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Syriacomment+%28Syria+Comment%29
>
>
> To me this is more evidence that Bill is correct that
> intergovernmental-ism is not the way forward in IG, and that CS
> (including the IGC) should resist at every opportunity.
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> McTim
> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
> route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
>
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> More interesting developments in Syria as countries are warned by the
> >> Syrian Government:
> >>
> >>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/10/world/middleeast/syria-warns-countries-not-to-recognize-opposition.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
> >> On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 11:49 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Andrea
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 9, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Bill,
> >>> >
> >>> > but doesn't this kind of horse trading already take place anyway, now
> >>> > that the Internet is seen as a strategic component of geopolitical
> >>> > strategies by the "heavy weights" (and increasingly, by mid- and
> light
> >>> > weights, too)?
> >>>
> >>> Not sure, I guess it would depend how we specify what we're talking
> >>> about.  Can you give me examples of governments engaging in
> geopolitical
> >>> horse trading across distinct issue-areas in ways that have impacted
> global
> >>> IG, like votes on sanctions or agricultural trade or whatever being
> traded
> >>> for votes on Internet names, numbers, standards, etc?  And whether or
> not we
> >>> can identify some, the next question is, would centralizing global IG
> under
> >>> a UN intergovernmental body increase the propensity to engage in this,
> >>> reduce it, or have no impact either way?  I believe it would increase
> it
> >>> significantly, but would be interested in hearing the counter-argument.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Bill
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On 10/9/11, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> >>> >> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it
> is
> >>> >>> the
> >>> >>> message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN
> >>> >> sanctions
> >>> >> on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there was
> >>> >> busy
> >>> >> hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body to
> >>> >> develop
> >>> >> global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the bodies
> >>> >> responsible
> >>> >> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including
> >>> >> global
> >>> >> standards setting."  Then we can have intergovernmental horse
> trading
> >>> >> over
> >>> >> all aspects of global IG with Russia, China, et al linking voting
> >>> >> deals on
> >>> >> issues like their proposed code of conduct for acceptable Internet
> >>> >> speech,
> >>> >> TLDs, address assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and
> >>> >> other
> >>> >> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open
> >>> >> Internet…
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Bill
> >>> > ____________________________________________________________
> >>> > 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
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> ____________________________________________________________
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> >> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> >> Cell: +679 998 2851
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> > Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> > Cell: +679 998 2851
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/43f92624/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, 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


From riaz.tayob at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 02:28:39 2011
From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:28:39 +0300
Subject: [governance] Secret Orders Target Email: WikiLeaks Backer's
 Information Sought
In-Reply-To: <CAKJmU8R2yiGWnprf1TO+2DibcJV40tHmaXqCD10bfq2NmS9xsw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKJmU8R2yiGWnprf1TO+2DibcJV40tHmaXqCD10bfq2NmS9xsw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E929097.6030706@gmail.com>

[affected party not party to the case?]

<http://on.wsj.com/pWFyRw>
OCTOBER 10, 2011
Secret Orders Target Email
WikiLeaks Backer's Information Sought
By JULIA ANGWIN
The U.S. government has obtained a controversial type of secret court
order to force Google Inc. and small Internet provider Sonic.net Inc.
to turn over information from the email accounts of WikiLeaks
volunteer Jacob Appelbaum, according to documents reviewed by The Wall
Street Journal.
Sonic said it fought the government's order and lost, and was forced
to turn over information. Challenging the order was "rather expensive,
but we felt it was the right thing to do," said Sonic's chief
executive, Dane Jasper. The government's request included the email
addresses of people Mr. Appelbaum corresponded with the past two
years, but not the full emails.
Both Google and Sonic pressed for the right to inform Mr. Appelbaum of
the secret court orders, according to people familiar with the
investigation. Google declined to comment. Mr. Appelbaum, 28 years
old, hasn't been charged with wrongdoing.
The court clashes in the WikiLeaks case provide a rare public window
into the growing debate over a federal law that lets the government
secretly obtain information from people's email and cellphones without
a search warrant. Several court decisions have questioned whether the
law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, violates the U.S.
Constitution's Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable
searches and seizures.
WikiLeaks is a publisher of documents that people can submit
anonymously. After WikiLeaks released a trove of classified government
diplomatic cables last year, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said
the U.S. was pursuing an "active criminal investigation" of WikiLeaks.
Passed in 1986, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act is older
than the World Wide Web, which was dreamed up in 1989. A coalition of
technology companies—including Google, Microsoft Corp. and AT&T
Corp.—is lobbying Congress to update the law to require search
warrants in more digital investigations.
The law was designed to give the same protections to electronic
communications that were already in place for phone calls and regular
mail. But it didn't envision a time when cellphones transmitted
locations and people stored important documents on remote services,
such as Gmail, rather than on their own computers.
Law enforcement uses the law to obtain some emails, cellphone-location
records and other digital documents without getting a search warrant
or showing probable cause that a crime has been committed. Instead the
law sets a lower bar: The government must show only "reasonable
grounds" that the records would be "relevant and material" to an
investigation.
As a result, it can be easier for law-enforcement officers to see a
person's email information than it is to see their postal mail.
Another significant difference: A person whose email is inspected this
way often never knows a search was conducted. That's because court
orders under the 1986 law are almost always sealed, and the Internet
provider is generally prohibited from notifying the customer whose
data is searched. By contrast, search warrants are generally delivered
to people whose property is being searched.
The secrecy makes it difficult to determine how often such court
orders are used. Anecdotal data suggest that digital searches are
becoming common.
In 2009, Google began disclosing the volume of requests for user data
it received from the U.S. government. In the six months ending Dec.
31, Google said it received 4,601 requests and complied with 94% of
them. The data include all types of requests, including search
warrants, subpoenas and requests under the 1986 law.
At a Senate hearing in April on whether the 1986 law needs updating,
Associate Deputy Attorney General James A. Baker cautioned Congress
"that raising the standard for obtaining information under ECPA may
substantially slow criminal and national security investigations."
In May, the ECPA's author, U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), said the
original law is "significantly outdated and outpaced by rapid changes
in technology." He introduced a bill adopting many of the
recommendations of the technology coalition lobbying for changes to
the law.
Some federal courts have questioned the law's constitutionality. In a
landmark case in December, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit ruled that the government violated the Fourth Amendment when
it obtained 27,000 emails without a search warrant.
"The police may not storm the post office and intercept a letter, and
they are likewise forbidden from using the phone system to make a
clandestine recording of a telephone call—unless they get a warrant,"
Judge Danny Boggs wrote in the 98-page opinion. "It only stands to
reason that, if government agents compel an [Internet service
provider] to surrender the contents of a subscriber's emails, those
agents have thereby conducted a Fourth Amendment search."
In August, the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of New York
over-ruled a government request to obtain cellphone location records
without a warrant, calling it "Orwellian." Judge Nicholas Garaufis
wrote: "It is time that the courts begin to address whether
revolutionary changes in technology require changes to existing Fourth
Amendment doctrine." The government has appealed.
The WikiLeaks case became a test bed for the law's interpretation
earlier this year when Twitter fought a court order to turn over
records from the accounts of WikiLeaks supporters including Mr.
Appelbaum.
Mr. Applebaum is a developer for the Tor Project Inc., a Walpole,
Mass., nonprofit that provides free tools that help people maintain
their anonymity online. Tor's tools are often used by people living in
countries where Internet traffic is monitored by the government. Tor
obtains some of its funding from the U.S. government.
Mr. Appelbaum has also volunteered for WikiLeaks, which recommends
people use Tor's tools to protect their identities when submitting
documents to its website. In April 2010, Mr. Appelbaum's involvement
in WikiLeaks was inadvertently disclosed publicly in a blog post on
the website of the Committee to Protect Journalists. The reporter,
Danny O'Brien, said Mr. Appelbaum had thought he was speaking
anonymously. Mr. O'Brien said he later offered to remove Mr.
Appelbaum's name from the post.
After the blog post appeared, Mr. Appelbaum became a public advocate
for WikiLeaks. In June, he gave a speech at a Northern California
technology camp where he called WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange one
of the "biggest inspirations in my life."
On Dec. 14, the U.S. Department of Justice obtained a court order for
information from the Twitter account of people including Mr. Appelbaum
and WikiLeaks supporters Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of the
Icelandic parliament, and Rop Gonggrijp, a Dutch computer programmer.
Neither has been charged with wrongdoing.
The order sought the "Internet protocol," or IP, addresses of the
devices from which people logged into their accounts. An IP address is
a unique number assigned to a device connected to the Internet.
The order also sought the email addresses of the people with whom
those accounts communicated. The order was filed under seal, but
Twitter successfully won from the court the right to notify the
subscribers whose information was sought.
On Jan. 26, attorneys for Mr. Appelbaum, Mr. Gonggrijp and Ms.
Jonsdottir jointly filed a motion to vacate the court order. They
argued, among other things, that because IP addresses can be used to
locate a person in "specific geographic destinations," it constituted
a search under the Fourth Amendment and thus required a warrant.
The government argued that IP addresses don't reveal precise location
and are more akin to phone numbers. At a Feb. 15 hearing, Assistant
U.S. Attorney John S. Davis said, "this is a standard… investigative
measure that is used in criminal investigations every day of the year
all over this country."
On March 11, U.S. Magistrate Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan denied the
WikiLeaks supporters' motion. They have appealed.
Twitter hasn't turned over information from the accounts of Mr.
Appelbaum, Ms. Jonsdottir and Mr. Gonggrijp, according to people
familiar with the investigation.
The court orders reviewed by the Journal seek the same type of
information that Twitter was asked to turn over. The secret Google
order is dated Jan. 4 and directs the search giant to hand over the IP
address from which Mr. Appelbaum logged into his gmail.com account and
the email and IP addresses of the users with whom he communicated
dating back to Nov. 1, 2009. It isn't clear whether Google fought the
order or turned over documents.
The secret Sonic order is dated April 15 and directs Sonic to turn
over the same type of information from Mr. Appelbaum's email account
dating back to Nov. 1, 2009.
On Aug. 31, the court agreed to lift the seal on the Sonic order to
provide Mr. Appelbaum a copy of it. Sonic Chief Executive Mr. Jasper
said the company also sought to unseal the rest of its legal filings
but that request "came back virtually entirely denied."
-- 


____________________________________________________________
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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct 10 03:33:33 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:33:33 +0800
Subject: [governance] Re: Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <4E929FCD.6060100@ciroap.org>

I am about to send out the ballots, but so far I only have one election
statement (from Sonigitu Ekpe).  If any of the other candidates (Asif
Kabani, Imran Ahmed Shah, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro) would like to make
a statement, please send it to me or the list within the next 24 hours. 
Any late nominations may also be sent within that period.

Thanks.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/bfe08636/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/bfe08636/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 04:05:43 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 20:05:43 +1200
Subject: [governance] Secret Orders Target Email: WikiLeaks Backer's
 Information Sought
In-Reply-To: <4E929097.6030706@gmail.com>
References: <CAKJmU8R2yiGWnprf1TO+2DibcJV40tHmaXqCD10bfq2NmS9xsw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E929097.6030706@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiD5OvGgfZGCQ2V7nExQvPWEYTzdYb3ik2Do+ZincYP6Aw@mail.gmail.com>

This is interesting.

I would much rather see Governments serve Orders rather than take the
information arbitrarily through the use of Trojans. I would rather see
processes for extraction of information rather than forced extractions.

Both are not good but which one would I rather settle for? Process and due
process

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com> wrote:

> [affected party not party to the case?]
>
> <http://on.wsj.com/pWFyRw>
> OCTOBER 10, 2011
> Secret Orders Target Email
> WikiLeaks Backer's Information Sought
> By JULIA ANGWIN
> The U.S. government has obtained a controversial type of secret court
> order to force Google Inc. and small Internet provider Sonic.net Inc.
> to turn over information from the email accounts of WikiLeaks
> volunteer Jacob Appelbaum, according to documents reviewed by The Wall
> Street Journal.
> Sonic said it fought the government's order and lost, and was forced
> to turn over information. Challenging the order was "rather expensive,
> but we felt it was the right thing to do," said Sonic's chief
> executive, Dane Jasper. The government's request included the email
> addresses of people Mr. Appelbaum corresponded with the past two
> years, but not the full emails.
> Both Google and Sonic pressed for the right to inform Mr. Appelbaum of
> the secret court orders, according to people familiar with the
> investigation. Google declined to comment. Mr. Appelbaum, 28 years
> old, hasn't been charged with wrongdoing.
> The court clashes in the WikiLeaks case provide a rare public window
> into the growing debate over a federal law that lets the government
> secretly obtain information from people's email and cellphones without
> a search warrant. Several court decisions have questioned whether the
> law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, violates the U.S.
> Constitution's Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable
> searches and seizures.
> WikiLeaks is a publisher of documents that people can submit
> anonymously. After WikiLeaks released a trove of classified government
> diplomatic cables last year, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said
> the U.S. was pursuing an "active criminal investigation" of WikiLeaks.
> Passed in 1986, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act is older
> than the World Wide Web, which was dreamed up in 1989. A coalition of
> technology companies—including Google, Microsoft Corp. and AT&T
> Corp.—is lobbying Congress to update the law to require search
> warrants in more digital investigations.
> The law was designed to give the same protections to electronic
> communications that were already in place for phone calls and regular
> mail. But it didn't envision a time when cellphones transmitted
> locations and people stored important documents on remote services,
> such as Gmail, rather than on their own computers.
> Law enforcement uses the law to obtain some emails, cellphone-location
> records and other digital documents without getting a search warrant
> or showing probable cause that a crime has been committed. Instead the
> law sets a lower bar: The government must show only "reasonable
> grounds" that the records would be "relevant and material" to an
> investigation.
> As a result, it can be easier for law-enforcement officers to see a
> person's email information than it is to see their postal mail.
> Another significant difference: A person whose email is inspected this
> way often never knows a search was conducted. That's because court
> orders under the 1986 law are almost always sealed, and the Internet
> provider is generally prohibited from notifying the customer whose
> data is searched. By contrast, search warrants are generally delivered
> to people whose property is being searched.
> The secrecy makes it difficult to determine how often such court
> orders are used. Anecdotal data suggest that digital searches are
> becoming common.
> In 2009, Google began disclosing the volume of requests for user data
> it received from the U.S. government. In the six months ending Dec.
> 31, Google said it received 4,601 requests and complied with 94% of
> them. The data include all types of requests, including search
> warrants, subpoenas and requests under the 1986 law.
> At a Senate hearing in April on whether the 1986 law needs updating,
> Associate Deputy Attorney General James A. Baker cautioned Congress
> "that raising the standard for obtaining information under ECPA may
> substantially slow criminal and national security investigations."
> In May, the ECPA's author, U.S. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), said the
> original law is "significantly outdated and outpaced by rapid changes
> in technology." He introduced a bill adopting many of the
> recommendations of the technology coalition lobbying for changes to
> the law.
> Some federal courts have questioned the law's constitutionality. In a
> landmark case in December, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth
> Circuit ruled that the government violated the Fourth Amendment when
> it obtained 27,000 emails without a search warrant.
> "The police may not storm the post office and intercept a letter, and
> they are likewise forbidden from using the phone system to make a
> clandestine recording of a telephone call—unless they get a warrant,"
> Judge Danny Boggs wrote in the 98-page opinion. "It only stands to
> reason that, if government agents compel an [Internet service
> provider] to surrender the contents of a subscriber's emails, those
> agents have thereby conducted a Fourth Amendment search."
> In August, the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of New York
> over-ruled a government request to obtain cellphone location records
> without a warrant, calling it "Orwellian." Judge Nicholas Garaufis
> wrote: "It is time that the courts begin to address whether
> revolutionary changes in technology require changes to existing Fourth
> Amendment doctrine." The government has appealed.
> The WikiLeaks case became a test bed for the law's interpretation
> earlier this year when Twitter fought a court order to turn over
> records from the accounts of WikiLeaks supporters including Mr.
> Appelbaum.
> Mr. Applebaum is a developer for the Tor Project Inc., a Walpole,
> Mass., nonprofit that provides free tools that help people maintain
> their anonymity online. Tor's tools are often used by people living in
> countries where Internet traffic is monitored by the government. Tor
> obtains some of its funding from the U.S. government.
> Mr. Appelbaum has also volunteered for WikiLeaks, which recommends
> people use Tor's tools to protect their identities when submitting
> documents to its website. In April 2010, Mr. Appelbaum's involvement
> in WikiLeaks was inadvertently disclosed publicly in a blog post on
> the website of the Committee to Protect Journalists. The reporter,
> Danny O'Brien, said Mr. Appelbaum had thought he was speaking
> anonymously. Mr. O'Brien said he later offered to remove Mr.
> Appelbaum's name from the post.
> After the blog post appeared, Mr. Appelbaum became a public advocate
> for WikiLeaks. In June, he gave a speech at a Northern California
> technology camp where he called WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange one
> of the "biggest inspirations in my life."
> On Dec. 14, the U.S. Department of Justice obtained a court order for
> information from the Twitter account of people including Mr. Appelbaum
> and WikiLeaks supporters Birgitta Jonsdottir, a member of the
> Icelandic parliament, and Rop Gonggrijp, a Dutch computer programmer.
> Neither has been charged with wrongdoing.
> The order sought the "Internet protocol," or IP, addresses of the
> devices from which people logged into their accounts. An IP address is
> a unique number assigned to a device connected to the Internet.
> The order also sought the email addresses of the people with whom
> those accounts communicated. The order was filed under seal, but
> Twitter successfully won from the court the right to notify the
> subscribers whose information was sought.
> On Jan. 26, attorneys for Mr. Appelbaum, Mr. Gonggrijp and Ms.
> Jonsdottir jointly filed a motion to vacate the court order. They
> argued, among other things, that because IP addresses can be used to
> locate a person in "specific geographic destinations," it constituted
> a search under the Fourth Amendment and thus required a warrant.
> The government argued that IP addresses don't reveal precise location
> and are more akin to phone numbers. At a Feb. 15 hearing, Assistant
> U.S. Attorney John S. Davis said, "this is a standard… investigative
> measure that is used in criminal investigations every day of the year
> all over this country."
> On March 11, U.S. Magistrate Judge Theresa Carroll Buchanan denied the
> WikiLeaks supporters' motion. They have appealed.
> Twitter hasn't turned over information from the accounts of Mr.
> Appelbaum, Ms. Jonsdottir and Mr. Gonggrijp, according to people
> familiar with the investigation.
> The court orders reviewed by the Journal seek the same type of
> information that Twitter was asked to turn over. The secret Google
> order is dated Jan. 4 and directs the search giant to hand over the IP
> address from which Mr. Appelbaum logged into his gmail.com account and
> the email and IP addresses of the users with whom he communicated
> dating back to Nov. 1, 2009. It isn't clear whether Google fought the
> order or turned over documents.
> The secret Sonic order is dated April 15 and directs Sonic to turn
> over the same type of information from Mr. Appelbaum's email account
> dating back to Nov. 1, 2009.
> On Aug. 31, the court agreed to lift the seal on the Sonic order to
> provide Mr. Appelbaum a copy of it. Sonic Chief Executive Mr. Jasper
> said the company also sought to unseal the rest of its legal filings
> but that request "came back virtually entirely denied."
> --
>
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/1cd7f85b/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct 10 05:49:01 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 17:49:01 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>	<4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca> <CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>

On 08/10/11 10:14, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> I edited my earlier comments, here is the revised version:

I like this, though probably we can lose the UN-style wording of the
preamble (I wrote my first IGC statement in the same way, but others
pointed out that as CS we don't need to imitate the intergovernmental
style).

> *Acknowledging* that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there
> is merit in improving institutional coordination as well as
> coordination among all stakeholders at the regional, subregional and
> national levels, the IGC believes that this does not justify the
> creation of an institution[s1]
> <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/s.tamanikaiwaimaro/My%20Documents/IGF/Sala%27s%20comments%20on%20the%20IBSA%20Proposal.doc#_msocom_1> ;

This may be too strong?  Last year, we wrote in a consensus statement
that "It is imperative that this [governance] deficit continue to be
addressed through the existing institutions, and where appropriate
through new institutional developments that comply with the accepted
process criteria of being open, accountable, transparent, democratic and
inclusive."

> [Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote
> on the issue – although we should be prepared for the results]
>

I agree that this could be helpful, so I propose to add an optional
section about these issues to the upcoming coordinator election poll,
after the vote for coordinator, so as not to bother people with multiple
polls in a short space of time.  This will make it easier to draft a
short statement that, as Carlos said, is proactive in suggesting
improvements rather than just harping on the negatives of the IBSA
proposal.  Even if we miss the Summit dates, it will be useful to have
this up our sleeves for later.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/cbe37c4c/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/cbe37c4c/attachment.bin>

From kabani at isd-rc.org  Mon Oct 10 07:47:53 2011
From: kabani at isd-rc.org (Asif Kabani)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:47:53 +0500
Subject: [governance] Re: Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <4E929FCD.6060100@ciroap.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <4E929FCD.6060100@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAOzvoR3PNCFH-LureNOfgzrr+TopEWumRFA-Bz0WAOCtmvMAuQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jaremy and Colleagues,


Please find here the statement



Dear Friends,

Greetings



I would like to take this opportunity be elected as coordinator at Civil
Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC), to serve the IGC community and
promote IGC mission.



Kindly, note that I have 10-15 years of direct experience and education in
Internet Governance (IG) and working with Civil Society in developing world,
working with Donors and Government, educated by Diplo Foundation in Internet
Governance and ISOC as Next Generation Leader for IG.



I see that next 12-24 months, will be very crucial for IGC and Civil Society
in context of IGF between UN and stakeholders of IGF, including IGC, in
appointment if Chair and Coordinator of IGF, the secondly is the ICANN new
developments in context of internet governance. Here I would like to bring
my rich experience if IG working with Government, Donors, CSO and Academic,
to the crucial future ahead and make IGC a organization with VOICE and
MUSCLE in public policy in Internet Governance and Development with all the
member’s of IGC.



Perhaps this is the time IGC should have coordinators, like myself whom have
direct influence and lobbying in UN and government in policy, provision,
production, and finance to Internet Governance.  IGC must develop a way
forward and best practices for civil society to come forward and interact
with stakeholder, donors, private sector, academic and Government, Since, I
have direct experience working with all above especially, the civil society,
UN and Government in last 10+ year. I strongly believe that IGC should now
become the most important Voice at the WSIS 2015 and other international
forums.



The IGC must have ultimate and clear position of caucus in all public policy
forms in ICANN, IGF, etc. Since I have worked at IGF, at UNOG and understand
how diplomacy is done this will be a assets to IGC. Also note that I have
participate in various National and International Forums, like IEEE,  IGFs,
ICANN and ISOC meetings for last several years, this rich experience will
also come handy to IGC and its community.



IGC must raise the voices strongly and act together, to lobby governments
and private sector why they should work together with us on equal together.
We all as members will work promote the interests of the developing parts of
the world and will make IGC a pro-active organization is we need we will
make various committees on strategy development, technical committee, etc
and forums so members with particular internet can share input and make
public policy research. We will all work together and will IGC as
organization that next generations will remember it for centuries to come.



My name if Asif Kabani, I have MBA in NGO Management, MBA in Marketing and
IT, MSc in Development Studies from Wye college University of London, and
Post Graduate in Internet Governance in 2007 from Diplo Foundation and Next
Generation Leadership (NGL) in 2010-2011 Diplo-ISOC. I have worked with UN
System in various countries, including United Nations office in Geneva at
IGF thanks to Diplo, traveled to Asia, Europe, and other developed and
developing countries for my work with Civil Society; I have very good
communication skills with understanding of values and cultures.



Review the facts that if I am selected as coordinator, I will serve the
whole caucus and each and every member of the community, as one team
and willing to share, facilitate, listen and coordinate as the member. I
also like to say that at least one of the co-coordinator and members of this
caucus be selected at MAG for IGF, UN / International forms and Government
advisory, where policy-making is done. This will bring IGC stakeholder input
in Regional and National Government in Public Policy with pro-active members
of IGC, This way, the linkage between caucus with stakeholders will promote,
and strengthened.



Your valuable opinions and suggestions are most welcome.



It's great to have a colleagues who will *support by voting* me as
co-cordinator of IGC.



Thank you all for your kindness. Please accept my sincere gratitude.



*Asif Kabani*
Skype: kabaniasif
Email: kabana.asif at gmail.com




On 10 October 2011 12:33, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> **
> I am about to send out the ballots, but so far I only have one election
> statement (from Sonigitu Ekpe).  If any of the other candidates (Asif
> Kabani, Imran Ahmed Shah, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro) would like to make a
> statement, please send it to me or the list within the next 24 hours.  Any
> late nominations may also be sent within that period.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>



-- 
Asif Kabani
Email: kabani.asif at gmail.com


“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/1a424fc1/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Mon Oct 10 08:04:13 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 09:04:13 -0300
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com> <E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4E92DF3D.1080608@cafonso.ca>

Hmmm, this reminds me of USA's silence when its pawns, Bahrein's
dictatorship, arrests and condemns physicians and nurses, or when its
other pawns, the Saudi Arabian dictatorship... but these are not issues
for this list, I guess.

The BR government has already made clear in several instances that the
document is a *draft*, that it is discussing it with Brazilian civil
society (and I can testify it is) and that it will be rewritten. Romulo,
the Itamaraty person chiefly involved in this process, is open to
dialogue with anyone, Brazilian or not, as Bill himself can testify.

BTW, this trilateral forum called IBSA is *not* focused on Internet
governance (this is just a small part of a much larger effort since at
least 2003, when even the talk of IG was non-existent), and there is a
complex set of discussions on a wide array of themes for collaboration
in process.

Also, the ways of civil society participation in government policy is
not uniform in the three countries, each government has its own views,
and this is a joint proposal. So be it, central countries' folks try to
sit on their own tails while bashing us for having our tails.

fraternal regards

--c.a.

On 10/09/2011 06:48 AM, William Drake wrote:
> On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> 
>> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is
>> the message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
> 
> including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN
> sanctions on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there
> was busy hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body
> to develop global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the
> bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the
> Internet, including global standards setting."  Then we can have
> intergovernmental horse trading over all aspects of global IG with
> Russia, China, et al linking voting deals on issues like their proposed
> code of conduct for acceptable Internet speech, TLDs, address
> assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and other
> geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…
> 
> Bill
____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 09:29:29 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:29:29 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
	<4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>
	<CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Sorry for joining the discussion late, but I tried to find out what will be
forwarded to IBSA summit and in what status. As far as I could understand,
from the Brazilian gov: a) the seminar will be acknowledged in the summit b)
there will be a proposal that CS from IBSA participates fully on the
formulation of any proposal of institutional change/mechanism and c) it will
be proposed that wider discussions with CS from the three countries is
carried out to improve IBSA proposal before any further step is taken.

In any case, I think that it does not diminishes the importance of inputs
from IGC, especially if these inputs are aimed at concreteley improving
IBSA´s set of recommendations. In my personal view, there is no other
country/group of countries that is being more open to dialogue about their
position on institutional changes than IBSA, so concrete proposals that the
three countries could take on board would be more useful than making a
statement to solely be against X, Y or Z.

Best wishes,

Marília

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> **
> On 08/10/11 10:14, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
>  I edited my earlier comments, here is the revised version:
>
>
> I like this, though probably we can lose the UN-style wording of the
> preamble (I wrote my first IGC statement in the same way, but others pointed
> out that as CS we don't need to imitate the intergovernmental style).
>
>
> *Acknowledging* that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there is
> merit in improving institutional coordination as well as coordination among
> all stakeholders at the regional, subregional and national levels, the IGC
> believes that this does not justify the creation of an institution[s1] ;
>
>
> This may be too strong?  Last year, we wrote in a consensus statement that
> "It is imperative that this [governance] deficit continue to be addressed
> through the existing institutions, and where appropriate through new
> institutional developments that comply with the accepted process criteria of
> being open, accountable, transparent, democratic and inclusive."
>
>
>  [Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote on
> the issue – although we should be prepared for the results]
>
>
> I agree that this could be helpful, so I propose to add an optional section
> about these issues to the upcoming coordinator election poll, after the vote
> for coordinator, so as not to bother people with multiple polls in a short
> space of time.  This will make it easier to draft a short statement that, as
> Carlos said, is proactive in suggesting improvements rather than just
> harping on the negatives of the IBSA proposal.  Even if we miss the Summit
> dates, it will be useful to have this up our sleeves for later.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>



-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/1cd8cd91/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 10:00:13 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:00:13 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
	<4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>
	<CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>
	<CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK11KVofuESQfNBEwEwjRvHEiB=VWPunWQ0iW5SK3p2=qA@mail.gmail.com>

Interesting suggestions for a statement are being discussed. I hope to be
able to comment on Sala´s e-mail soon.

I just would like to reinforce that, as Jeremy mentioned, IGC has produced a
statememt about enhanced cooperation. I could find it online here:
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan043237.pdf
and I take the opportunity to ask Jeremy to "pull" all our previous
statements to the current website, as they are one of the most important
elements of our institutional memory.

On that statement IGC pointed out four general options about EC. The
discussion to reach this 4 options was a very rich one, and I believe that
any position from IGC about the institutional aspect of EC should build on
that 4 options, not start from scratch.

I also take the opportunity to ask for more clarification about the
suggestion for the poll, as I did not understand what would be the topics
covered.

Best wishes,

Marília

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Sorry for joining the discussion late, but I tried to find out what will be
> forwarded to IBSA summit and in what status. As far as I could understand,
> from the Brazilian gov: a) the seminar will be acknowledged in the summit b)
> there will be a proposal that CS from IBSA participates fully on the
> formulation of any proposal of institutional change/mechanism and c) it will
> be proposed that wider discussions with CS from the three countries is
> carried out to improve IBSA proposal before any further step is taken.
>
> In any case, I think that it does not diminishes the importance of inputs
> from IGC, especially if these inputs are aimed at concreteley improving
> IBSA´s set of recommendations. In my personal view, there is no other
> country/group of countries that is being more open to dialogue about their
> position on institutional changes than IBSA, so concrete proposals that the
> three countries could take on board would be more useful than making a
> statement to solely be against X, Y or Z.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Marília
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
>> **
>> On 08/10/11 10:14, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>>  I edited my earlier comments, here is the revised version:
>>
>>
>> I like this, though probably we can lose the UN-style wording of the
>> preamble (I wrote my first IGC statement in the same way, but others pointed
>> out that as CS we don't need to imitate the intergovernmental style).
>>
>>
>> *Acknowledging* that the WGIG in its 2005 report concluded that there is
>> merit in improving institutional coordination as well as coordination among
>> all stakeholders at the regional, subregional and national levels, the IGC
>> believes that this does not justify the creation of an institution[s1] ;
>>
>>
>> This may be too strong?  Last year, we wrote in a consensus statement that
>> "It is imperative that this [governance] deficit continue to be addressed
>> through the existing institutions, and where appropriate through new
>> institutional developments that comply with the accepted process criteria of
>> being open, accountable, transparent, democratic and inclusive."
>>
>>
>>  [Suggestion to IGC: We can hold a white monkey survey and take a vote on
>> the issue – although we should be prepared for the results]
>>
>>
>> I agree that this could be helpful, so I propose to add an optional
>> section about these issues to the upcoming coordinator election poll, after
>> the vote for coordinator, so as not to bother people with multiple polls in
>> a short space of time.  This will make it easier to draft a short statement
>> that, as Carlos said, is proactive in suggesting improvements rather than
>> just harping on the negatives of the IBSA proposal.  Even if we miss the
>> Summit dates, it will be useful to have this up our sleeves for later.
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Dr 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
>>
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
>> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
>> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
>> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
>> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>>
>> *www.consumersinternational.org*
>> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>



-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/ee9918f1/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct 10 10:41:15 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 22:41:15 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK11KVofuESQfNBEwEwjRvHEiB=VWPunWQ0iW5SK3p2=qA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org> <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160> <4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca> <CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com> <4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org> <CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com> <CACpVkK11KVofuESQfNBEwEwjRvHEiB=VWPunWQ0iW5SK3p2=qA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BCFD6BAC-9C1D-4A62-B6D8-139C7F4333C8@ciroap.org>

On 10/10/2011, at 10:00 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:

> I just would like to reinforce that, as Jeremy mentioned, IGC has produced a statememt about enhanced cooperation. I could find it online here: http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan043237.pdf  and I take the opportunity to ask Jeremy to "pull" all our previous statements to the current website, as they are one of the most important elements of our institutional memory.

It's also on our Statements page (http://www.igcaucus.org/statements) at http://www.igcaucus.org/node/43.

> On that statement IGC pointed out four general options about EC. The discussion to reach this 4 options was a very rich one, and I believe that any position from IGC about the institutional aspect of EC should build on that 4 options, not start from scratch.
> 
> I also take the opportunity to ask for more clarification about the suggestion for the poll, as I did not understand what would be the topics covered.


As it stands in draft, I have pulled out each of the substantive paragraphs of the IBSA summary and asked for the respondent to state how strongly they agree/disagree, and then I have asked "If there is no new body, then what else do you suggest" and given the following options (which draw on, but don't replicate, those from our EC submission), plus an "Other" option for respondents to enter their own suggestion:
No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
More options are welcome...

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/2a84d41e/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/2a84d41e/attachment.bin>

From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 11:40:54 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 12:40:54 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <BCFD6BAC-9C1D-4A62-B6D8-139C7F4333C8@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
	<p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160>
	<4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>
	<CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>
	<CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CACpVkK11KVofuESQfNBEwEwjRvHEiB=VWPunWQ0iW5SK3p2=qA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BCFD6BAC-9C1D-4A62-B6D8-139C7F4333C8@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Jeremy and all,

I would like to make some observations on the idea of making a poll.

- Usually, voting comes right after a time of discussion, like elections
come after a campaign. This gives the range of ideas an opportunity to be
heard and debated and it makes the options (and the arguments behind them)
fresh in the memories of voters. As far as I remember, the last in depth
discussion about EC took place about a year ago (under the thread named
second draft statement on enhanced cooperation). It does not look like a
good procedure to call a vote on those options now, without a new round of
dicussions on the list.

- Taking the risk to be misinterpreted, I need to express that I find that,
the way it is proposed, this approach will probably lead to unintended
results, mainly because:

a) The political timing. After the reaction to the proposal advanced by
China and Russia, the mood is very much "let´s not change anything". I know
I will make a bad comparison, but it reminds me of initiatives that call on
a referendum to forbid abortion right after a baby has been abandoned or
killed. Timing means much in politics and one may wonder why we would be
pushing for an internal poll now, so many months after our substative
discussion.

b) The political use that can be made about this poll, if it is conducted
the way it has been proposed. The governments themselves (without mentioning
CS) have all said that IBSA document needs improvement. Even people that
could support the general idea in some paragraphs will not support it the
way it is. But the external interpretations about CS statement will
certainly not take these nuances and the draft nature of the doc into
account. CS statement will be very exploitable and I think we should avoid
being politically used by other groups.

c) using IBSA´s draft document as a way to find our position on EC is a
political decision with implications. We are not doing the same with more
concrete documents on the same matter, that are still pretty much
under-discussed, such as the ones from the US and the Commission.
Politically, this means that all attention will continue to be on IBSA,
while these other proposals continue to move forward, more or less
unhindered.

Lastly, I believe many of our members are still in "post-IGF rest" and the
activity on the list has diminished. I think it is not a good moment to call
on a poll on such an important issue, that needs dicussion.

My proposal would be to hang on to the idea of the poll (which is a good one
after all), but to conduct it in 1 or 2 months, raising the discussion on
the list first, and doing that based on IGC´s previous statement, and not on
a concrete proposal by any country/group.

Of course, that does not mean that we should not make critics/suggestions to
IBSA doc, to be sent to the summit.

Best wishes,
Marília

On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> On 10/10/2011, at 10:00 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>
> I just would like to reinforce that, as Jeremy mentioned, IGC has produced
> a statememt about enhanced cooperation. I could find it online here:
> http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan043237.pdf
> and I take the opportunity to ask Jeremy to "pull" all our previous
> statements to the current website, as they are one of the most important
> elements of our institutional memory.
>
>
> It's also on our Statements page (http://www.igcaucus.org/statements) at
> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/43.
>
> On that statement IGC pointed out four general options about EC. The
> discussion to reach this 4 options was a very rich one, and I believe that
> any position from IGC about the institutional aspect of EC should build on
> that 4 options, not start from scratch.
>
> I also take the opportunity to ask for more clarification about the
> suggestion for the poll, as I did not understand what would be the topics
> covered.
>
>
> As it stands in draft, I have pulled out each of the substantive paragraphs
> of the IBSA summary and asked for the respondent to state how strongly they
> agree/disagree, and then I have asked "If there is no new body, then what
> else do you suggest" and given the following options (which draw on, but
> don't replicate, those from our EC submission), plus an "Other" option for
> respondents to enter their own suggestion:
>
>    1. No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered
>    by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
>    2. Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce
>    policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can
>    use.
>    3. Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary
>    network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
>
> More options are welcome...
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/9f224ae1/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Mon Oct 10 13:01:57 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder at itforchange.net)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 22:31:57 +0530
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <BCFD6BAC-9C1D-4A62-B6D8-139C7F4333C8@ciroap.org>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>
    <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160> <4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>
    <CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>
    <4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>
    <CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com>
    <CACpVkK11KVofuESQfNBEwEwjRvHEiB=VWPunWQ0iW5SK3p2=qA@mail.gmail.com>
    <BCFD6BAC-9C1D-4A62-B6D8-139C7F4333C8@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <9effbf3ad119ac711b2cc5161a61030c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>


>
> As it stands in draft, I have pulled out each of the substantive
> paragraphs of the IBSA summary and asked for the respondent to state how
> strongly they agree/disagree, and then I have asked "If there is no new
> body, then what else do you suggest" and given the following options
> (which draw on, but don't replicate, those from our EC submission), plus
> an "Other" option for respondents to enter their own suggestion:
> No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered by
> existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
> Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy
> options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
> Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary network
> of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
> More options are welcome...

This subject, first of all, deserves a rich and involved open discussion.
I am very uncomfortable about directly going to poll with such unclear,
and perhaps leading, set of options.  The topic is simply too important
and central to IGC's work for that. Perhaps civil society's biggest claim
to legitimacy is through the channels and processes of deliberative
democracy. Questions will have to be asked and answered about this
important issue in this forum before we proceed to taking a sense of the
IGC's collective opinion.

 I am still in Africa and dont much regular access to the Internet, but
very much look forward to an engaged discussion on this subject.

parminder

>
> --
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
> and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
> organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
> movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. 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, 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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 13:23:49 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:23:49 -0700
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>

+ 1
 
M

-----Original Message-----
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Marilia Maciel
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 8:41 AM
To: Jeremy Malcolm
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
18-19 Summit?


Dear Jeremy and all,

I would like to make some observations on the idea of making a poll.

- Usually, voting comes right after a time of discussion, like elections
come after a campaign. This gives the range of ideas an opportunity to be
heard and debated and it makes the options (and the arguments behind them)
fresh in the memories of voters. As far as I remember, the last in depth
discussion about EC took place about a year ago (under the thread named
second draft statement on enhanced cooperation). It does not look like a
good procedure to call a vote on those options now, without a new round of
dicussions on the list.

- Taking the risk to be misinterpreted, I need to express that I find that,
the way it is proposed, this approach will probably lead to unintended
results, mainly because:

a) The political timing. After the reaction to the proposal advanced by
China and Russia, the mood is very much "let´s not change anything". I know
I will make a bad comparison, but it reminds me of initiatives that call on
a referendum to forbid abortion right after a baby has been abandoned or
killed. Timing means much in politics and one may wonder why we would be
pushing for an internal poll now, so many months after our substative
discussion.  

b) The political use that can be made about this poll, if it is conducted
the way it has been proposed. The governments themselves (without mentioning
CS) have all said that IBSA document needs improvement. Even people that
could support the general idea in some paragraphs will not support it the
way it is. But the external interpretations about CS statement will
certainly not take these nuances and the draft nature of the doc into
account. CS statement will be very exploitable and I think we should avoid
being politically used by other groups.

c) using IBSA´s draft document as a way to find our position on EC is a
political decision with implications. We are not doing the same with more
concrete documents on the same matter, that are still pretty much
under-discussed, such as the ones from the US and the Commission.
Politically, this means that all attention will continue to be on IBSA,
while these other proposals continue to move forward, more or less
unhindered.

Lastly, I believe many of our members are still in "post-IGF rest" and the
activity on the list has diminished. I think it is not a good moment to call
on a poll on such an important issue, that needs dicussion.   

My proposal would be to hang on to the idea of the poll (which is a good one
after all), but to conduct it in 1 or 2 months, raising the discussion on
the list first, and doing that based on IGC´s previous statement, and not on
a concrete proposal by any country/group.

Of course, that does not mean that we should not make critics/suggestions to
IBSA doc, to be sent to the summit.

Best wishes,
Marília


On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:


On 10/10/2011, at 10:00 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:


I just would like to reinforce that, as Jeremy mentioned, IGC has produced a
statememt about enhanced cooperation. I could find it online here:
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan043237.pdf
and I take the opportunity to ask Jeremy to "pull" all our previous
statements to the current website, as they are one of the most important
elements of our institutional memory.



It's also on our Statements page (http://www.igcaucus.org/statements) at
http://www.igcaucus.org/node/43.


On that statement IGC pointed out four general options about EC. The
discussion to reach this 4 options was a very rich one, and I believe that
any position from IGC about the institutional aspect of EC should build on
that 4 options, not start from scratch.

I also take the opportunity to ask for more clarification about the
suggestion for the poll, as I did not understand what would be the topics
covered.



As it stands in draft, I have pulled out each of the substantive paragraphs
of the IBSA summary and asked for the respondent to state how strongly they
agree/disagree, and then I have asked "If there is no new body, then what
else do you suggest" and given the following options (which draw on, but
don't replicate, those from our EC submission), plus an "Other" option for
respondents to enter their own suggestion:

1.	No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered
by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are. 

2.	Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce
policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can
use. 

3.	Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary
network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.

More options are welcome...

-- 


Dr 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 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599> 

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/> 
Twitter  <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int> @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> . Don't print
this email unless necessary.





-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/d76ba008/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, 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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 13:58:28 2011
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 13:58:28 -0400
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
Message-ID: <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>

Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...

On 10/10/11, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> + 1
>
> M
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
> Of Marilia Maciel
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 8:41 AM
> To: Jeremy Malcolm
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
> 18-19 Summit?
>
>
> Dear Jeremy and all,
>
> I would like to make some observations on the idea of making a poll.
>
> - Usually, voting comes right after a time of discussion, like elections
> come after a campaign. This gives the range of ideas an opportunity to be
> heard and debated and it makes the options (and the arguments behind them)
> fresh in the memories of voters. As far as I remember, the last in depth
> discussion about EC took place about a year ago (under the thread named
> second draft statement on enhanced cooperation). It does not look like a
> good procedure to call a vote on those options now, without a new round of
> dicussions on the list.
>
> - Taking the risk to be misinterpreted, I need to express that I find that,
> the way it is proposed, this approach will probably lead to unintended
> results, mainly because:
>
> a) The political timing. After the reaction to the proposal advanced by
> China and Russia, the mood is very much "let´s not change anything". I know
> I will make a bad comparison, but it reminds me of initiatives that call on
> a referendum to forbid abortion right after a baby has been abandoned or
> killed. Timing means much in politics and one may wonder why we would be
> pushing for an internal poll now, so many months after our substative
> discussion.
>
> b) The political use that can be made about this poll, if it is conducted
> the way it has been proposed. The governments themselves (without mentioning
> CS) have all said that IBSA document needs improvement. Even people that
> could support the general idea in some paragraphs will not support it the
> way it is. But the external interpretations about CS statement will
> certainly not take these nuances and the draft nature of the doc into
> account. CS statement will be very exploitable and I think we should avoid
> being politically used by other groups.
>
> c) using IBSA´s draft document as a way to find our position on EC is a
> political decision with implications. We are not doing the same with more
> concrete documents on the same matter, that are still pretty much
> under-discussed, such as the ones from the US and the Commission.
> Politically, this means that all attention will continue to be on IBSA,
> while these other proposals continue to move forward, more or less
> unhindered.
>
> Lastly, I believe many of our members are still in "post-IGF rest" and the
> activity on the list has diminished. I think it is not a good moment to call
> on a poll on such an important issue, that needs dicussion.
>
> My proposal would be to hang on to the idea of the poll (which is a good one
> after all), but to conduct it in 1 or 2 months, raising the discussion on
> the list first, and doing that based on IGC´s previous statement, and not on
> a concrete proposal by any country/group.
>
> Of course, that does not mean that we should not make critics/suggestions to
> IBSA doc, to be sent to the summit.
>
> Best wishes,
> Marília
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 10/10/2011, at 10:00 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>
>
> I just would like to reinforce that, as Jeremy mentioned, IGC has produced a
> statememt about enhanced cooperation. I could find it online here:
> http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/un/unpan043237.pdf
> and I take the opportunity to ask Jeremy to "pull" all our previous
> statements to the current website, as they are one of the most important
> elements of our institutional memory.
>
>
>
> It's also on our Statements page (http://www.igcaucus.org/statements) at
> http://www.igcaucus.org/node/43.
>
>
> On that statement IGC pointed out four general options about EC. The
> discussion to reach this 4 options was a very rich one, and I believe that
> any position from IGC about the institutional aspect of EC should build on
> that 4 options, not start from scratch.
>
> I also take the opportunity to ask for more clarification about the
> suggestion for the poll, as I did not understand what would be the topics
> covered.
>
>
>
> As it stands in draft, I have pulled out each of the substantive paragraphs
> of the IBSA summary and asked for the respondent to state how strongly they
> agree/disagree, and then I have asked "If there is no new body, then what
> else do you suggest" and given the following options (which draw on, but
> don't replicate, those from our EC submission), plus an "Other" option for
> respondents to enter their own suggestion:
>
> 1.	No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered
> by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
>
> 2.	Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce
> policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can
> use.
>
> 3.	Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary
> network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
>
> More options are welcome...
>
> --
>
>
> Dr 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 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599>
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> Twitter  <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int> @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> . Don't print
> this email unless necessary.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From shailam at yahoo.com  Mon Oct 10 14:44:23 2011
From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 11:44:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <9effbf3ad119ac711b2cc5161a61030c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
References: <4E8E9DC5.8090404@ciroap.org>    <p0624080acab47fc6b1d1@192.168.1.160> <4E8F018D.9050809@cafonso.ca>    <CAJwbTiAgYFPZQAaCZRpHG=+70wc2xm0ApMfxGzn1UjnY=KVtXw@mail.gmail.com>    <4E92BF8D.2050004@ciroap.org>    <CACpVkK3S6KLnYqJs81-2eGm0+3n_i=oQ4ARDhGSMqnqYVrT0Qw@mail.gmail.com>    <CACpVkK11KVofuESQfNBEwEwjRvHEiB=VWPunWQ0iW5SK3p2=qA@mail.gmail.com>    <BCFD6BAC-9C1D-4A62-B6D8-139C7F4333C8@ciroap.org> <9effbf3ad119ac711b2cc5161a61030c.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <1318272263.16332.YahooMailNeo@web161901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

+1
Shaila

 
The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !
..................... the renaissance of composure !



________________________________
From: "parminder at itforchange.net" <parminder at itforchange.net>
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
Cc: Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of 18-19 Summit?


>
> As it stands in draft, I have pulled out each of the substantive
> paragraphs of the IBSA summary and asked for the respondent to state how
> strongly they agree/disagree, and then I have asked "If there is no new
> body, then what else do you suggest" and given the following options
> (which draw on, but don't replicate, those from our EC submission), plus
> an "Other" option for respondents to enter their own suggestion:
> No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered by
> existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
> Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy
> options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
> Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary network
> of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
> More options are welcome...

This subject, first of all, deserves a rich and involved open discussion.
I am very uncomfortable about directly going to poll with such unclear,
and perhaps leading, set of options.  The topic is simply too important
and central to IGC's work for that. Perhaps civil society's biggest claim
to legitimacy is through the channels and processes of deliberative
democracy. Questions will have to be asked and answered about this
important issue in this forum before we proceed to taking a sense of the
IGC's collective opinion.

I am still in Africa and dont much regular access to the Internet, but
very much look forward to an engaged discussion on this subject.

parminder

>
> --
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
> and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
> organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
> movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. 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, 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/dac2fe3b/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 14:37:43 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 15:37:43 -0300
Subject: [governance] Multi-stakeholder participation on internet governance
 - paper available online
Message-ID: <CACpVkK2ZipBvA+Askvt_nb7uh6MEsEbuuTpWXTJArKpYAcgyEw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

We would like to share with you the paper "Multi-stakeholder participation
on internet governance: An analysis from a developing country, civil society
perspective", written by myself and Carlos Affonso, from the Center for
Technology and Society of Getulio Vargas Foundation - Brazil, available
from:
http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/issue/governance/multi-stakeholder-participation-internet-governanc

This paper is part of APC´s Network of networks initiative. We would like to
thank very much APC, specially Valeria Betancourt and Pablo Accousto, for
the support and patience.

Any comments or suggestions are very much welcome.

Best wishes,
Marília and Carlos Affonso

-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil



-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111010/405032b6/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 19:43:03 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:43:03 +1200
Subject: [governance] Multi-stakeholder participation on internet
 governance - paper available online
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK2ZipBvA+Askvt_nb7uh6MEsEbuuTpWXTJArKpYAcgyEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK2ZipBvA+Askvt_nb7uh6MEsEbuuTpWXTJArKpYAcgyEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBBiu7sfnFpamrsNqMqohQtkTu8ei8FPofRc618uHXT_Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Marilia,

This was very interesting reading and I would just like to make a few
observations.

On page 4 of your paper, you highlight that the definition of Internet
Governance (as per WGIG 2005 Report) sets the parameters for how people are
to engage in internet governance and I think you used" how actors are to
engage in internet governance". You mention that it all actors have equal
importance and you mention that participation of non-state actors should not
take place on an *ad hoc* basis, depending upon invitation or depending on
the subject, as commonly happens in the discussion of other international
issues. You also pointed to the final documents in both cases of the WSIS
did not specify their roles and responsibilities in internet governance. I
like how you talked about the strengths and weaknesses of that. I would like
to add on to the strengths of it not specifying the roles and
responsibilities. I think it is important that it is not prescribed.

Even without the WGIG defining internet governance, the reality is states or
governments are mandated by the people (in countries that have elections -
social contract #referendum #voting ) to govern, the private sector often
called the engines and drivers of national economy are called to operate
their businesses. Civil society (in countries that encourage the presence of
civil society, there are jurisdictions who struggle to be heard eg. Iran,
Yemen, Fiji etc) have a role to act as watchdogs and to look out for the
interests of the marginalised.

How government functions in Iran is different from how government functions
in Australia etc. Similarly, civil society in South Africa will be different
from civil society in Nauru. There are different contexts and the plurality
of jurisprudence is clear. Similarly private sector in Spain is different
from private sector in the Pacific. Behind the "seen" or visible realms and
the reasons for this are varied and it could include things like approaches
to "regulations" by the state, political will etc. Things like universal
service and access, there are diverse views on how to better give access to
the underserved, some say that there should be things like Universal Service
Obligations (USOs) and some believe that is archaic but that effective
competition is far better able to sustainably allow underserved communities
to have better access. The beauty about IGF is that it allows everyone to
come equally to the table without having their role defined to discuss on an
equal footing lessons and challenges to enable each other to develop and
leapfrog.

This was why it was interesting to see "VIP" badges at the IGF. One
transcendent thing about the Internet is the manner in which it is
equalising and democratising power, in terms of the "user perspective) for
example you have Parliamentarians in Europe who are conscious about how they
behave. There are still jurisdictions in the world where authority figures
do not want to be "transparent". I had mentioned that governments all over
the world behave differently not only because they are in different
geographical locations, but have different contexts and subject to different
jurisprudence which causes them to behave differently and as such laws and
regulations, norms are different. It is kind of like where you can expect
skimpy dressing in Bondi  and for someone to be covered up in Afghanistan.

Similarly countries differ in how they view privacy and censorship because
governments behave differently. The danger of defining the roles and
responsibilities of actors in internet governance is that in our attempt for
efficiency, we then endanger vulnerable groups. Imagine  civil society in a
country where free speech is codified to be allowed and permitted but on the
ground is treated as sedition. The IGF like a market is able to set its own
tempo without being regulated. The danger of regulating the market or the
IGF is that there will be conflicting applications. Governments already
regulate ISPs in their countries and set rules for competition and drive
policy. We already have the ITU, WTO, WIPO that looks after ICT and work
towards to improving policy and building capacity. Remember we have some
intergovernmental institutions that are on record for having views that the
internet should be patented, see:
http://boingboing.net/2011/10/08/wipo-boss-the-web-would-have-been-better-if-it-was-patented-and-its-users-had-to-pay-license-fees.html

There are developing countries whose governments do not believe that the
private sector nor civil society should be consulted when making policy and
decisions. Would defining their roles and responsibilities create any impact
in the domestic context. From my observations, at least in my part of the
world, it would not. What is needed is the creation of a safe place where
people can dialogue where Governments can come in time to learn and
see/witness the tangible benefits of a multi-stakeholder dialogue and
discussion that is not regulated nor prescribed.

To seek to have the IGF to be absorbed into the multilateral framework is to
seek to have ITU to absorb the IGF. Would it not be better that we retained
the IGF multistakeholder process independent and open and lobby to have the
ITU be more inclusive of involving others into their working groups other
than the current paying members which are largely governments and
corporations that can afford the levies.

In terms of increasing participation and meaningful participation, there are
people who are doing what they can to increase participation and educate
their regions on internet governance and whilst the pace seems slow there is
powerful collaboration between actors and industries as they gather to work
together. To increase participation, we have to work together with the IG
Secretariat and stakeholders and map out ways to increase and strengthen
participation but in my mind, the absorption into the UN system is not the
answer.

I think we should ask people what they want to see before we dialogue on
methodology that way the discussion on methodology can be fruitful.

Best,



On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> We would like to share with you the paper "Multi-stakeholder participation
> on internet governance: An analysis from a developing country, civil society
> perspective", written by myself and Carlos Affonso, from the Center for
> Technology and Society of Getulio Vargas Foundation - Brazil, available
> from:
>
> http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/issue/governance/multi-stakeholder-participation-internet-governanc
>
> This paper is part of APC´s Network of networks initiative. We would like
> to thank very much APC, specially Valeria Betancourt and Pablo Accousto, for
> the support and patience.
>
> Any comments or suggestions are very much welcome.
>
> Best wishes,
> Marília and Carlos Affonso
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/d2ef60d6/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 20:32:52 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:32:52 +1200
Subject: [governance] Multi-stakeholder participation on internet
 governance - paper available online
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiBBiu7sfnFpamrsNqMqohQtkTu8ei8FPofRc618uHXT_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK2ZipBvA+Askvt_nb7uh6MEsEbuuTpWXTJArKpYAcgyEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBBiu7sfnFpamrsNqMqohQtkTu8ei8FPofRc618uHXT_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiB0fb=_-pcO54ZjLxg_18a_CpNyUyXoDxOCH+FRvsXkcg@mail.gmail.com>

This link:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/10/us-cambodia-genocide-idUSTRE7994H620111010

also in a way illustrates the point that I was trying to make about the
diversity of jurisprudence.

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Marilia,
>
> This was very interesting reading and I would just like to make a few
> observations.
>
> On page 4 of your paper, you highlight that the definition of Internet
> Governance (as per WGIG 2005 Report) sets the parameters for how people are
> to engage in internet governance and I think you used" how actors are to
> engage in internet governance". You mention that it all actors have equal
> importance and you mention that participation of non-state actors should not
> take place on an *ad hoc* basis, depending upon invitation or depending on
> the subject, as commonly happens in the discussion of other international
> issues. You also pointed to the final documents in both cases of the WSIS
> did not specify their roles and responsibilities in internet governance. I
> like how you talked about the strengths and weaknesses of that. I would like
> to add on to the strengths of it not specifying the roles and
> responsibilities. I think it is important that it is not prescribed.
>
> Even without the WGIG defining internet governance, the reality is states
> or governments are mandated by the people (in countries that have elections
> - social contract #referendum #voting ) to govern, the private sector often
> called the engines and drivers of national economy are called to operate
> their businesses. Civil society (in countries that encourage the presence of
> civil society, there are jurisdictions who struggle to be heard eg. Iran,
> Yemen, Fiji etc) have a role to act as watchdogs and to look out for the
> interests of the marginalised.
>
> How government functions in Iran is different from how government functions
> in Australia etc. Similarly, civil society in South Africa will be different
> from civil society in Nauru. There are different contexts and the plurality
> of jurisprudence is clear. Similarly private sector in Spain is different
> from private sector in the Pacific. Behind the "seen" or visible realms and
> the reasons for this are varied and it could include things like approaches
> to "regulations" by the state, political will etc. Things like universal
> service and access, there are diverse views on how to better give access to
> the underserved, some say that there should be things like Universal Service
> Obligations (USOs) and some believe that is archaic but that effective
> competition is far better able to sustainably allow underserved communities
> to have better access. The beauty about IGF is that it allows everyone to
> come equally to the table without having their role defined to discuss on an
> equal footing lessons and challenges to enable each other to develop and
> leapfrog.
>
> This was why it was interesting to see "VIP" badges at the IGF. One
> transcendent thing about the Internet is the manner in which it is
> equalising and democratising power, in terms of the "user perspective) for
> example you have Parliamentarians in Europe who are conscious about how they
> behave. There are still jurisdictions in the world where authority figures
> do not want to be "transparent". I had mentioned that governments all over
> the world behave differently not only because they are in different
> geographical locations, but have different contexts and subject to different
> jurisprudence which causes them to behave differently and as such laws and
> regulations, norms are different. It is kind of like where you can expect
> skimpy dressing in Bondi  and for someone to be covered up in Afghanistan.
>
> Similarly countries differ in how they view privacy and censorship because
> governments behave differently. The danger of defining the roles and
> responsibilities of actors in internet governance is that in our attempt for
> efficiency, we then endanger vulnerable groups. Imagine  civil society in a
> country where free speech is codified to be allowed and permitted but on the
> ground is treated as sedition. The IGF like a market is able to set its own
> tempo without being regulated. The danger of regulating the market or the
> IGF is that there will be conflicting applications. Governments already
> regulate ISPs in their countries and set rules for competition and drive
> policy. We already have the ITU, WTO, WIPO that looks after ICT and work
> towards to improving policy and building capacity. Remember we have some
> intergovernmental institutions that are on record for having views that the
> internet should be patented, see:
> http://boingboing.net/2011/10/08/wipo-boss-the-web-would-have-been-better-if-it-was-patented-and-its-users-had-to-pay-license-fees.html
>
> There are developing countries whose governments do not believe that the
> private sector nor civil society should be consulted when making policy and
> decisions. Would defining their roles and responsibilities create any impact
> in the domestic context. From my observations, at least in my part of the
> world, it would not. What is needed is the creation of a safe place where
> people can dialogue where Governments can come in time to learn and
> see/witness the tangible benefits of a multi-stakeholder dialogue and
> discussion that is not regulated nor prescribed.
>
> To seek to have the IGF to be absorbed into the multilateral framework is
> to seek to have ITU to absorb the IGF. Would it not be better that we
> retained the IGF multistakeholder process independent and open and lobby to
> have the ITU be more inclusive of involving others into their working groups
> other than the current paying members which are largely governments and
> corporations that can afford the levies.
>
> In terms of increasing participation and meaningful participation, there
> are people who are doing what they can to increase participation and educate
> their regions on internet governance and whilst the pace seems slow there is
> powerful collaboration between actors and industries as they gather to work
> together. To increase participation, we have to work together with the IG
> Secretariat and stakeholders and map out ways to increase and strengthen
> participation but in my mind, the absorption into the UN system is not the
> answer.
>
> I think we should ask people what they want to see before we dialogue on
> methodology that way the discussion on methodology can be fruitful.
>
> Best,
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> We would like to share with you the paper "Multi-stakeholder
>> participation on internet governance: An analysis from a developing country,
>> civil society perspective", written by myself and Carlos Affonso, from the
>> Center for Technology and Society of Getulio Vargas Foundation - Brazil,
>> available from:
>>
>> http://www.apc.org/en/pubs/issue/governance/multi-stakeholder-participation-internet-governanc
>>
>> This paper is part of APC´s Network of networks initiative. We would like
>> to thank very much APC, specially Valeria Betancourt and Pablo Accousto, for
>> the support and patience.
>>
>> Any comments or suggestions are very much welcome.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Marília and Carlos Affonso
>>
>> --
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>> FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Center for Technology and Society
>> Getulio Vargas Foundation
>> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>> FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Center for Technology and Society
>> Getulio Vargas Foundation
>> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/be52e09a/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct 10 20:39:45 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 08:39:45 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>

On 11/10/2011, at 1:58 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:

> Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
> representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
> willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
> collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
> well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...


Then, I don't think we will be able to finish a substantively useful statement in time for the IBSA Summit but could only restate the more high-level ideas from our enhanced cooperation statement, since our collective view has not been much refined since then.  That is OK, because it is better to be thoughtful than on time, but if anyone does not wish us to miss the opportunity to contribute ahead of the IBSA Summit then please help to discuss:

How to respond to each of these assertions?
There is an institutional gap in managing global Internet processes and developing policies for Internet at a global level which needs to be addressed.
This requires a new body (outside of the IGF, ITU, OECD, etc.) to coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies pertaining to the Internet.
If a new body is created, it should be located within the UN system.
If a new body is created, it should develop and establish international public policies on cross-cutting Internet-related global issues.
If a new body is created, it should oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting.
If a new body is created, it should address developmental issues related to the Internet.
If a new body is created, it should undertake arbitration and dispute resolution, where necessary.
If a new body is created, it should be responsible for crisis management
If a new body is not formed within the UN system, how else should global public policies for the Internet be set, in cases that fall outside the  competence of any global body?
No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/edcb8ce3/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/edcb8ce3/attachment.bin>

From aizu at anr.org  Mon Oct 10 21:57:55 2011
From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:57:55 +0900
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKgcOHb+sOYWhqLacHdceJTzE+y-CgN7pn5SO22ocxN6NA@mail.gmail.com>

There will be IGF open consultation scheduled sometime in November.
If we could reach good stage to call for a consensus, that will be another
good target.

The next meeting of the CSTD WG on IGF improbement will be taken
place on Oct 31-Nov 2 in Geneva.

We like to make a request to make it more open, allowing "observer" in the room.

So there are more opportunities to come.

izumi


2011/10/11 Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>:
> On 11/10/2011, at 1:58 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:
>
> Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
> representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
> willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
> collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
> well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...
>
> Then, I don't think we will be able to finish a substantively useful
> statement in time for the IBSA Summit but could only restate the more
> high-level ideas from our enhanced cooperation statement, since our
> collective view has not been much refined since then.  That is OK, because
> it is better to be thoughtful than on time, but if anyone does not wish us
> to miss the opportunity to contribute ahead of the IBSA Summit then please
> help to discuss:
> How to respond to each of these assertions?
>
> There is an institutional gap in managing global Internet processes and
> developing policies for Internet at a global level which needs to be
> addressed.
> This requires a new body (outside of the IGF, ITU, OECD, etc.) to coordinate
> and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies pertaining to the
> Internet.
> If a new body is created, it should be located within the UN system.
> If a new body is created, it should develop and establish international
> public policies on cross-cutting Internet-related global issues.
> If a new body is created, it should oversee the bodies responsible for
> technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global
> standards setting.
> If a new body is created, it should address developmental issues related to
> the Internet.
> If a new body is created, it should undertake arbitration and dispute
> resolution, where necessary.
> If a new body is created, it should be responsible for crisis management
>
> If a new body is not formed within the UN system, how else should global
> public policies for the Internet be set, in cases that fall outside the
> competence of any global body?
>
> No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered by
> existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
> Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy
> options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
> Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary network
> of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From aizu at anr.org  Mon Oct 10 22:00:39 2011
From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:00:39 +0900
Subject: [governance] Re: Nominees for next co-coordinator position
In-Reply-To: <4E929FCD.6060100@ciroap.org>
References: <290EA09D-040C-4EF5-9FE9-444E563217DB@ciroap.org> <4E929FCD.6060100@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKhkQyoDiLasVOJj=2CVtJJV1OPj=kbgYW49PPYbrxET1g@mail.gmail.com>

Though election is soon to be taken place, I would urge all nominees to send
your statement asap.  It is very important for us to make an informed decision
and your ability to appeal or demonstrate to all IGC members in writing within
limited time is also a very important skill for our coordinator.  Please!!

izumi


2011/10/10 Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>:
> I am about to send out the ballots, but so far I only have one election
> statement (from Sonigitu Ekpe).  If any of the other candidates (Asif
> Kabani, Imran Ahmed Shah, Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro) would like to make a
> statement, please send it to me or the list within the next 24 hours.  Any
> late nominations may also be sent within that period.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless
> necessary.



-- 
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<

          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo

           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
           << Writing the Future of the History >>
                                www.anr.org
____________________________________________________________
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


From lmcknigh at syr.edu  Mon Oct 10 22:14:27 2011
From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 02:14:27 +0000
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
 <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>,<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>

Hi,

I agree with Tracy, Marila and Parminder that a poll is premature, seeing as we would be placing hard votes on what the proponents are stating is a soft and possibly malleable thing, that is, the IBSA proposal; without much time for reflection and online discussion here.

But on other hand, I would not belittle our own EC handiwork from 2010, which remains imho a substantive contribution to the dialogue. So just bringing our '10 formulation of EC alternatives to IBSA's attention is a contribution to the current state of play.

Which includes recognition of the IGF as among other things, a place in which EC happens.  (So..proponents of EC in UN system should be happy since it's already there; and proponents for IG status quo should be happy since IGF...well let's just say, it has certain limitations. ; )

Seriously, the 2010 statement of IGC on EC should be our own starting point, not the particular formulation of an evolving draft from others.  We should push IBSA towards utilizing our own language and formulations, not react to specifics of the IBSA draft without time for much thought or reflection. imho.

Lee




________________________________
From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of Jeremy Malcolm [jeremy at ciroap.org]
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 8:39 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google
Subject: Re: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of 18-19 Summit?

On 11/10/2011, at 1:58 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:

Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...

Then, I don't think we will be able to finish a substantively useful statement in time for the IBSA Summit but could only restate the more high-level ideas from our enhanced cooperation statement, since our collective view has not been much refined since then.  That is OK, because it is better to be thoughtful than on time, but if anyone does not wish us to miss the opportunity to contribute ahead of the IBSA Summit then please help to discuss:

How to respond to each of these assertions?

  *   There is an institutional gap in managing global Internet processes and developing policies for Internet at a global level which needs to be addressed.
  *   This requires a new body (outside of the IGF, ITU, OECD, etc.) to coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies pertaining to the Internet.
  *   If a new body is created, it should be located within the UN system.
  *   If a new body is created, it should develop and establish international public policies on cross-cutting Internet-related global issues.
  *   If a new body is created, it should oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting.
  *   If a new body is created, it should address developmental issues related to the Internet.
  *   If a new body is created, it should undertake arbitration and dispute resolution, where necessary.
  *   If a new body is created, it should be responsible for crisis management

If a new body is not formed within the UN system, how else should global public policies for the Internet be set, in cases that fall outside the competence of any global body?

  *   No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
  *   Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
  *   Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.

--

Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org<http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
Twitter @ConsumersInt<http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>

Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/1fb817d8/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Mon Oct 10 22:18:00 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:18:00 +0800
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>,<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <4E93A758.5020906@ciroap.org>

On 11/10/11 10:14, Lee W McKnight wrote:
> But on other hand, I would not belittle our own EC handiwork from
> 2010, which remains imho a substantive contribution to the dialogue.
> So just bringing our '10 formulation of EC alternatives to IBSA's
> attention is a contribution to the current state of play. 

Yes, I will make sure that 2010 statement is delivered to the IBSA
negotiators, whilst we continue to discuss and develop more specific ideas.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/02df7e29/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/02df7e29/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 22:23:17 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:23:17 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBYD9MDF5zgZzzdcH_vZpPNm9jmzwD7=2ppz7HihsR1Og@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> On 11/10/2011, at 1:58 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:
>
> Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
> representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
> willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
> collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
> well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...
>
>
> Then, I don't think we will be able to finish a substantively useful
> statement in time for the IBSA Summit but could only restate the more
> high-level ideas from our enhanced cooperation statement, since our
> collective view has not been much refined since then.  That is OK, because
> it is better to be thoughtful than on time, but if anyone does not wish us
> to miss the opportunity to contribute ahead of the IBSA Summit then please
> help to discuss:
>
> How to respond to each of these assertions?
>
>    - There is an institutional gap in managing global Internet processes
>    and developing policies for Internet at a global level which needs to be
>    addressed.
>
> Organisations already exist to create policies etc. eg. Governments,
Regulators but if in "institutional gap" and global internet processes you
mean IANA/ICANN etc, then they should specify what specific institutional
gaps?

>
>    - This requires a new body (outside of the IGF, ITU, OECD, etc.) to
>    coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies
>    pertaining to the Internet.
>
> Unfortunately, the world does not work that way. This assertion effectively
requires stakeholders to give up their interests and render it towards this
global body. This is how "social contracts" work and is this feasible. They
can be coerced and forced to give it up through governments across the globe
but how does that place Internet Governance, what you will see then is the
shift to Government as opposed to Governance.

>
>    - If a new body is created, it should be located within the UN system.
>
> Some say that they want a new body but the UN has hundreds of pressing
crises that it is dealing with that involves the prioritisation of resources
and I don't foresee them creating an Institution within the UN but rather
pushing it to an existing institution that is already dealing with it and
the most plausible choice seems to be the ITU.

>
>    - If a new body is created, it should develop and establish
>    international public policies on cross-cutting Internet-related global
>    issues.
>
> Why create a new body when you already have bodies doing this and you can
lobby to improve policies within and processes?

>
>    - If a new body is created, it should oversee the bodies responsible
>    for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global
>    standards setting.
>
> Why create a new body when you already have bodies doing this and you can
lobby to improve policies within and processes?. The ITU creates and sets
ITU-T standards through its working groups etc and IETF has a
democratisation process in the creation and setting of standards which is
workable. What are the implications of having a one stop shop. There is a
saying that the only efficient government is a dictatorship and we are in
danger of creating a global dictatorship and authoritarian regime .

>
>    - If a new body is created, it should address developmental issues
>    related to the Internet.
>
> Countries should take responsibility for their development. The IGF is
simply a forum in which countries should be able to share processes etc for
the development whether it is in the area of e commerce, ICT strategies,
content filtering, capacity development etc. There are institutions that
already exist that address developmental issues, we should just promote
access to these processes such as meaningful participation in global policy
processes not create a new body.

>
>    - If a new body is created, it should undertake arbitration and dispute
>    resolution, where necessary.
>
> My comments above. This infers the creation of a multilateral treaty by
Governments at the expense of marginalising the voices of private sector and
civil society which will include arbitration and dispute resolution.

>
>    - If a new body is created, it should be responsible for crisis
>    management
>
> Firstly since when was it agreed that the body should be responsible for
crisis management.


> If a new body is not formed within the UN system, how else should global
> public policies for the Internet be set, in cases that fall outside the
> competence of any global body?
>
>    - No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered
>    by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
>
> The Budapest Convention is an example of global norm setting. It does not
attempt to create any institution to look after matters of cyber security as
governments have control and authority in their jurisdictions. You have a
variety of stakeholders such as CERTS, CSIRTs, ISPs, Interpol, etc but no
single institution can claim that it is the sole authority for global policy
processes in relation to cyber security.

>
>    - Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce policy
>    options which policy makers (including at the national level) can use.
>    - Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary
>    network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
>
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/b53829cf/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Mon Oct 10 22:37:26 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:37:26 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Syria
In-Reply-To: <4E92DF3D.1080608@cafonso.ca>
References: <CAJwbTiDD8-6puJ7aHKZb96dhzL=tFmfLh1uEnaeh4yBikiqegw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBn4BNVfD=hurQzPd+A+YuNi_iA=zSiRXp2cxG-r+CwFA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiCF=P8LG+dPuTy-aYKHmwTF2hZ_f7noeukvzF_YdtE_RA@mail.gmail.com>
	<E75F4034-0AD5-4F5F-9A26-D7148036F6D2@uzh.ch>
	<4E92DF3D.1080608@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCKkHL6_iLd03hSU_JfrWnU_WmTbu6nhYhRUmmqiuYk=A@mail.gmail.com>

You are right Carlos, precisely because of Governments different
perspectives because of their different jurisprudence, agendas and interest
is why we should never let any single institution to look after global
internet policy processes, there are just too many variables. On another
note, more interesting developments in Syria and abroad can be found:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/10/us-syria-opposition-technocrats-idUSTRE7994R520111010

2011/10/11 Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca>

> Hmmm, this reminds me of USA's silence when its pawns, Bahrein's
> dictatorship, arrests and condemns physicians and nurses, or when its
> other pawns, the Saudi Arabian dictatorship... but these are not issues
> for this list, I guess.
>
> The BR government has already made clear in several instances that the
> document is a *draft*, that it is discussing it with Brazilian civil
> society (and I can testify it is) and that it will be rewritten. Romulo,
> the Itamaraty person chiefly involved in this process, is open to
> dialogue with anyone, Brazilian or not, as Bill himself can testify.
>
> BTW, this trilateral forum called IBSA is *not* focused on Internet
> governance (this is just a small part of a much larger effort since at
> least 2003, when even the talk of IG was non-existent), and there is a
> complex set of discussions on a wide array of themes for collaboration
> in process.
>
> Also, the ways of civil society participation in government policy is
> not uniform in the three countries, each government has its own views,
> and this is a joint proposal. So be it, central countries' folks try to
> sit on their own tails while bashing us for having our tails.
>
> fraternal regards
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 10/09/2011 06:48 AM, William Drake wrote:
> > On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:40 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> >
> >> Also see the abstentions when reading the failed resolution and it is
> >> the message that it sends which is far more pronounced and profound.
> >
> > including Brazil, India, and South Africa, which also opposed UN
> > sanctions on Iran's "peaceful nuclear program" when the government there
> > was busy hunting down and executing protesters.  But want a new UN body
> > to develop global Internet policies and "integrate and oversee the
> > bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the
> > Internet, including global standards setting."  Then we can have
> > intergovernmental horse trading over all aspects of global IG with
> > Russia, China, et al linking voting deals on issues like their proposed
> > code of conduct for acceptable Internet speech, TLDs, address
> > assignments, standards, etc. to deals on sanctions and other
> > geopolitical items.  That should help ensure a stable and open Internet…
> >
> > Bill
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/e765e1e3/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Tue Oct 11 02:17:41 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder at itforchange.net)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:47:41 +0530
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To:  <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
References:     <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
    <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
    <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>,<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
    <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>

> Hi,
>
> I agree with Tracy, Marila and Parminder that a poll is premature, seeing
> as we would be placing hard votes on what the proponents are stating is a
> soft and possibly malleable thing, that is, the IBSA proposal; without
> much time for reflection and online discussion here.
>
> But on other hand, I would not belittle our own EC handiwork from 2010,
> which remains imho a substantive contribution to the dialogue. So just
> bringing our '10 formulation of EC alternatives to IBSA's attention is a
> contribution to the current state of play.
>
> Which includes recognition of the IGF as among other things, a place in
> which EC happens.  (So..proponents of EC in UN system should be happy
> since it's already there; and proponents for IG status quo should be happy
> since IGF...well let's just say, it has certain limitations. ; )

some quick comments.

the process of Enhanced cooperation (EC)is specifically to address global
internet related public policy issues. UN now recognizes EC and the IGF as
two 'distinct but complementary' processes. IGF being the forum for wide
policy dialogue and policy influence ensuring the broadest possible
participation. This is also how I see the whole thing. But, in any case,
even some people want to posit the IGF in a more substantive policy role,
they MUST then first tell us how IGF will actually fulfill that role.

The paradox is - those who want to say EC happens in the IGF are also
(with a few exceptions, like you/ Milton) among those who dont want to
change/improve the IGFs processes of substantive 'global' policy related
outcomes. I dont see such a position at all tenable. You cant have the
cake and eat it too.

So, can i request those who want to forward this position of 'EC is
happening in the IGF well enough, and there is no need for any other
institution' to pl spell out their position on how IGF will deliver
'global' policy outcomes, of whatever variety (soft etc). This is
especially relevant for the forthcoming meeting of the CSTD WG on IGF
improvements.

parminder


>
> Seriously, the 2010 statement of IGC on EC should be our own starting
> point, not the particular formulation of an evolving draft from others.
> We should push IBSA towards utilizing our own language and formulations,
> not react to specifics of the IBSA draft without time for much thought or
> reflection. imho.
>
> Lee
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [governance at lists.cpsr.org] on behalf of
> Jeremy Malcolm [jeremy at ciroap.org]
> Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 8:39 PM
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google
> Subject: Re: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
> 18-19 Summit?
>
> On 11/10/2011, at 1:58 AM, Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:
>
> Following on my own informal discussions at the IGF with
> representation from the Brazilian Government and noting the
> willingness of the Brazilians, at least, to discuss, compromise and
> collaborate, I am in support of Marilia's and Parminder's position as
> well as their rationale re: the proposed IGC Response/Statement ...
>
> Then, I don't think we will be able to finish a substantively useful
> statement in time for the IBSA Summit but could only restate the more
> high-level ideas from our enhanced cooperation statement, since our
> collective view has not been much refined since then.  That is OK, because
> it is better to be thoughtful than on time, but if anyone does not wish us
> to miss the opportunity to contribute ahead of the IBSA Summit then please
> help to discuss:
>
> How to respond to each of these assertions?
>
>   *   There is an institutional gap in managing global Internet processes
> and developing policies for Internet at a global level which needs to be
> addressed.
>   *   This requires a new body (outside of the IGF, ITU, OECD, etc.) to
> coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies
> pertaining to the Internet.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should be located within the UN system.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should develop and establish
> international public policies on cross-cutting Internet-related global
> issues.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should oversee the bodies responsible
> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including
> global standards setting.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should address developmental issues
> related to the Internet.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should undertake arbitration and
> dispute resolution, where necessary.
>   *   If a new body is created, it should be responsible for crisis
> management
>
> If a new body is not formed within the UN system, how else should global
> public policies for the Internet be set, in cases that fall outside the
> competence of any global body?
>
>   *   No institutional change, no global norm-setting in areas not covered
> by existing institutions, improved consultation in areas that are.
>   *   Institutional improvements to the IGF, to enable it to produce
> policy options which policy makers (including at the national level) can
> use.
>   *   Institutional change outside of the UN system, such as a voluntary
> network of policy makers that would consult with all stakeholders.
>
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
> and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
> organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
> movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org<http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> Twitter @ConsumersInt<http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>
>
> Read our email confidentiality
> notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. 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, 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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 02:43:39 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:43:39 +0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>

I'll bite.

I too am not in favor of a poll at this time  (or at all, since our
decisions are supposed to be based on a consensus model).



On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 9:17 AM, <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> > Hi,
>

<snip>


> The paradox is - those who want to say EC happens in the IGF are also
> (with a few exceptions, like you/ Milton) among those who dont want to
> change/improve the IGFs processes of substantive 'global' policy related
> outcomes. I dont see such a position at all tenable. You cant have the
> cake and eat it too.
>


If you are eating cake, you, by dfinition "have it" as well.

The fact of the matter is that EC happens in the IGF (all along the process,
not just at annual meetings).  I saw it with my own eyes here in Nairobi.



>
> So, can i request those who want to forward this position of 'EC is
> happening in the IGF well enough, and there is no need for any other
> institution' to pl spell out their position on how IGF will deliver
> 'global' policy outcomes, of whatever variety (soft etc). This is
> especially relevant for the forthcoming meeting of the CSTD WG on IGF
> improvements.
>


The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to increase
understanding.

I think it incumbent upon those who want a new body or bodies to spell out
EXACTLY in which areas there are gaps that need filling, how such a new body
would fill those gaps (and only those gaps).

Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral body (as
proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a power play.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/23f2b219/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, 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


From riaz.tayob at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 05:30:26 2011
From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:30:26 +0300
Subject: [governance] Pornography to be blocked by internet service
 providers unless users opt in
Message-ID: <4E940CB2.9050306@gmail.com>


  Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users
  opt in

David Cameron unveils deal with big four providers based on charity's 
proposals to protect children from sexual content

  *
      o

      o


      o <http://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fsociety%2F2011%2Foct%2F11%2Fpornography-internet-service-providers&title=>
        reddit this
        <http://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fsociety%2F2011%2Foct%2F11%2Fpornography-internet-service-providers&title=>


  * Ben Quinn <http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/benquinn>
  * The Guardian <http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian>, Tuesday 11
    October 2011
  * Article history
    <http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers#history-link-box>


Someone watching pornography on a computer
People who want to watch pornography online will have to 'opt in' with 
their internet service providers under measures to be announced by the 
PM. Photograph: Dan Chung for the Guardian

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet> service providers will 
have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as 
part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/pornography>.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron 
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/davidcameron> hosts No 10 meeting 
with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of 
proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

The prime minister is expected to announce other moves in line with the 
Christian charity's review, such as restrictions on aggressive 
advertising campaigns and certain types of images on billboards.

There will also be a website, Parentport, which parents can use to 
complain about television programmes, advertisements, products or 
services which they believe are inappropriate for children.

The site, which will direct complaints to the regulator dealing with 
that specific area of concern, is expected to be run by watchdogs 
including the Advertising Standards Authority, BBC Trust, British Board 
of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video 
Standards Council and Pan European Game Information.

The service providers involved are BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin. 
Customers who do not opt in to adult content will be unableto access 
pornographic websites.

Cameron gave strong backing in June to the Mothers' Union proposals 
after he commissioned a six-month review by the charity's chief 
executive, Reg Bailey. However, Cameron did not commit to legislation.

Bailey's recommendations included providing parents with one single 
website to make it easier to complain about any programme, advert, 
product or service, putting age restrictions on music videos and 
ensuring retailers offer age-appropriate clothes for children.

Cameron wrote to Bailey in June to thank him for his report. "I very 
much agree with the central approach you set out," the letter said.

"As you say, we should not try and wrap children up in cotton wool or 
simply throw our hands up and accept the world as it is. Instead, we 
should look to put 'the brakes on an unthinking drift towards 
ever-greater commercialisation and sexualisation'."

Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on 
initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing 
for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with 
suggestive slogans.

However, he recommended that if retailers do not make progress on the 
issue they should be forced to make the changes in 18 months.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/e4b3cefc/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: icon_reddit.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 600 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/e4b3cefc/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Someone-watching-pornogra-007.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 20885 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/e4b3cefc/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From KovenRonald at aol.com  Tue Oct 11 06:19:33 2011
From: KovenRonald at aol.com (KovenRonald at aol.com)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 06:19:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
Message-ID: <7ad21.71219e2.3bc57235@aol.com>

Dear All --

I certainly agree that placing existing I'net bodies, including ICANN and 
IGF under ITU is a bad idea whose time should not come.

The present setup is undoubtedly wanting from a theoretical viewpoint. But 
the practical reality is that it works, more or less. It maintains the 
distributed nature of the I'net.   

Those who were offended by seeing VIP badges on the most junior 
governmental representatives in Nairobi ain't seen nothing yet if the ITU were to take 
the control for which it has been itching from the start.

I wonder whether those in the IG Caucus who have spoken for ITU have 
actually seen it at work in Geneva and elsewhere. Its culture is distinctly 
opposed to multistakeholderism and in favor of government regulation and corporate 
influence.

The current setup is undoubtedly messy-looking on an organizational chart, 
but a beautiful, clear chart will most likely lead to centralized control 
with heavy influence of governments like China. 

We should be wary of what I see as the esthetics of the policeman, calling 
for everyone to stand to attention in the queue.We should learn not to be 
frightened of and to live with ambiguity, instability and uncertainty -- also 
amongst the principles operative in the universe.

Best regards, Rony Koven, World Press Freedom Committee


In a message dated 10/11/11 8:46:19 AM, dogwallah at gmail.com writes:


> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral body 
> (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a power play.
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/e18e95d7/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, 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


From Dixie at global-partners.co.uk  Tue Oct 11 07:51:06 2011
From: Dixie at global-partners.co.uk (Dixie Hawtin)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:51:06 +0100
Subject: [governance] Pornography to be blocked by internet service
 providers unless users opt in
In-Reply-To: <4E940CB2.9050306@gmail.com>
References: <4E940CB2.9050306@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16BC5877C4C91649AF7A89BF3BCA7AB83C9AAFA987@SERVER01.globalpartners.local>

Apparently the story isn't true - the ISPs had actually just agreed to initiate campaigns to assist parents in installing parental control filters which they provided anyways.

See the Open Rights Group response here: http://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2011/censorware-or-child-protection

Best,
Dixie

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of Riaz K Tayob
Sent: 11 October 2011 10:30
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in

Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in

David Cameron unveils deal with big four providers based on charity's proposals to protect children from sexual content
*

    *
    *
    *   [cid:image001.gif at 01CC8814.71013610] <http://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fsociety%2F2011%2Foct%2F11%2Fpornography-internet-service-providers&title=> reddit this<http://www.reddit.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.guardian.co.uk%2Fsociety%2F2011%2Foct%2F11%2Fpornography-internet-service-providers&title=>

 *   Ben Quinn<http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/benquinn>
 *   The Guardian<http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian>, Tuesday 11 October 2011
 *   Article history<http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers#history-link-box>
[cid:image002.jpg at 01CC8814.71013610]
People who want to watch pornography online will have to 'opt in' with their internet service providers under measures to be announced by the PM. Photograph: Dan Chung for the Guardian

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet<http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet> service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography<http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/pornography>.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron<http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/davidcameron> hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

The prime minister is expected to announce other moves in line with the Christian charity's review, such as restrictions on aggressive advertising campaigns and certain types of images on billboards.

There will also be a website, Parentport, which parents can use to complain about television programmes, advertisements, products or services which they believe are inappropriate for children.

The site, which will direct complaints to the regulator dealing with that specific area of concern, is expected to be run by watchdogs including the Advertising Standards Authority, BBC Trust, British Board of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video Standards Council and Pan European Game Information.

The service providers involved are BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin. Customers who do not opt in to adult content will be unableto access pornographic websites.

Cameron gave strong backing in June to the Mothers' Union proposals after he commissioned a six-month review by the charity's chief executive, Reg Bailey. However, Cameron did not commit to legislation.

Bailey's recommendations included providing parents with one single website to make it easier to complain about any programme, advert, product or service, putting age restrictions on music videos and ensuring retailers offer age-appropriate clothes for children.

Cameron wrote to Bailey in June to thank him for his report. "I very much agree with the central approach you set out," the letter said.

"As you say, we should not try and wrap children up in cotton wool or simply throw our hands up and accept the world as it is. Instead, we should look to put 'the brakes on an unthinking drift towards ever-greater commercialisation and sexualisation'."

Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with suggestive slogans.

However, he recommended that if retailers do not make progress on the issue they should be forced to make the changes in 18 months.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/f7f17604/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 600 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/f7f17604/attachment.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 20885 bytes
Desc: image002.jpg
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/f7f17604/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Tue Oct 11 08:38:24 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 09:38:24 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>

McTim,

On 10/11/2011 03:43 AM, McTim wrote:
> I'll bite.
> 
> I too am not in favor of a poll at this time  (or at all, since our 
> decisions are supposed to be based on a consensus model).
> 
[...]
> The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to 
> increase understanding.

It does already produce *some* outcomes, through the various results
from workshops and similar parallel meetings. And the IGF might change,
why not? Doesn't the "technical community" like changes in paradigms?

[...]
> 
> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral 
> body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
> power play.
> 

Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say. There is not
even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
bodies etc etc. This was sparked by MM's furor expressed in an article
in the IGP when first read the doc, and some people keep parroting this.
Amazing!

--c.a.
____________________________________________________________
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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Tue Oct 11 09:14:13 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 14:14:13 +0100
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CALLeeatSMOxcBLjsbN=z-9sx=eFVV+ZShepL9u4Gqpcr_f-kgw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Great Fellows and Friends,

Greetings!

I hope we are brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe we
could change the world, and talented enough to do it.

You all have put up good inputs! Most interesting is Mc Tim's, point  "power
play" quite interesting.

Looking forward to see how we change the way each of us  sees the world
today; "the Internet ".

Warm regards,

Sonigitu Ekpe
*Project Support Officer[Agriculturist]*
Cross River Farm Credit Scheme
Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources
3 Barracks Road P.M.B. 1119
Calabar - Cross River State, Nigeria.
Mobile +234 805 0232 469    Office + 234 802 751 0179

Skype: sonigitu.asibong.ekpe.aji

 *"LIFE is all about love and thanksgiving" *




On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 1:38 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> McTim,
>
> On 10/11/2011 03:43 AM, McTim wrote:
> > I'll bite.
> >
> > I too am not in favor of a poll at this time  (or at all, since our
> > decisions are supposed to be based on a consensus model).
> >
> [...]
> > The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to
> > increase understanding.
>
> It does already produce *some* outcomes, through the various results
> from workshops and similar parallel meetings. And the IGF might change,
> why not? Doesn't the "technical community" like changes in paradigms?
>
> [...]
> >
> > Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral
> > body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
> > power play.
> >
>
> Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
> grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say. There is not
> even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
> natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
> bodies etc etc. This was sparked by MM's furor expressed in an article
> in the IGP when first read the doc, and some people keep parroting this.
> Amazing!
>
> --c.a.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/cb35e53b/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, 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


From toml at communisphere.com  Tue Oct 11 10:31:54 2011
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 10:31:54 -0400
Subject: [governance] Voting for IGC Coordinator
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeatSMOxcBLjsbN=z-9sx=eFVV+ZShepL9u4Gqpcr_f-kgw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CALLeeatSMOxcBLjsbN=z-9sx=eFVV+ZShepL9u4Gqpcr_f-kgw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E94535A.9070804@communisphere.com>

I just cast my vote for coordinator and wanted to express my gratitude 
to all the candidates for presenting us with a rich choice.

Thanks to all.

Tom Lowenhaupt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/8a41fa9a/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, 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


From toml at communisphere.com  Tue Oct 11 12:43:41 2011
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 12:43:41 -0400
Subject: [governance] Complexity Mathematics, the EU and Global Governance -
 from The Globalist
Message-ID: <4E94723D.6000306@communisphere.com>

Andrea Illy presents some relevant thoughts on global governance in 
Complexity Mathematics, the EU and Global Governance, from The Globalist 
http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=9363. 
<http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=9363> The focus is on 
the EU but lessons for the Internet might be found there as well.

It starts:

    I am not a mathematician, but I have learned that we must grapple
    with some key concepts in order to prepare ourselves for the
    challenges that lie ahead for our civilization --- almost regardless
    of where we live. The first important principle to get our arms
    around is this: The more we grow, the more disorder we create.

    While this may sound like some anarchical idea, it really is the
    thermodynamic principle of entropy. Likewise, the more disorder that
    we have around, the more variables we create. As a result, we
    constantly create more complexity, because the definition of
    complexity is the interdependence of the many variables involved.

    Managing this complexity requires a completely different mental and
    scientific approach than the one we are used to. People tend to
    think in a linear fashion, simply because that's what we are used to
    doing.

    We humans are adept at, and used to, understanding three dimensions:
    length, width and height. Why is this significant? Because that is
    what typical linear mathematics captures. Once you surpass three
    variables in mathematics, however, then you start entering
    complexity mathematics, which is completely different. ...
    <http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=9363>

Best,

Tom Lowenhaupt, Director
Connecting.nyc Inc.

P.S. We're sponsoring a discussion on governance of the .nyc TLD this 
Thursday from 10-11 AM, New York time. It's using Google's Hangout 
feature as follows:

    What is the governance process for the .nyc TLD?

    Is the multi-stakeholder model used by ICANN and the IGF appropriate
    for a city TLD? (Typically thought of as business, government, civic
    society.) How might this be adjusted for New York's needs?

    We'll discuss the governance of other civic communication channels -
    public access cable, radio, tv - and how a city TLD might be best
    governed.

    The topic will be addressed at our regular Thursday "Tea and the
    .nyc TLD" Hangout on Google +, for one hour between 10-11 AM.  Go
    here  --> Google+ Hangout
    <https://plus.google.com/_/notifications/ngemlink?path=%2F%3Fgpinv%3DdfX6OlVqIUg%3Al0RUKL1XqtM>.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/4c7eb2ad/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Tue Oct 11 15:34:16 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 20:34:16 +0100
Subject: [governance] Complexity Mathematics, the EU and Global
 Governance - from The Globalist
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeasLkQ-TsdGNGfHpPVGBbqMHO1kC_TVU1nYJo2APFeKd8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4E94723D.6000306@communisphere.com>
	<CALLeeasLkQ-TsdGNGfHpPVGBbqMHO1kC_TVU1nYJo2APFeKd8g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeauOygGz7gikwnEH5riMJTpe3xYLOakm=oK_HodJPrG2mQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Uncle Tom, Great Fellows and Friends,

+1 "Managing the complexity requires a completely different mental and
Scientific approach than the one we are used to."

What an excellent issue for research and brainstorming!

Solutions within.

Thank you.

Accept my unreserved high esteemed regards!

Sea

On 11 Oct 2011 17:46, "Thomas Lowenhaupt" <toml at communisphere.com> wrote:

 Andrea Illy presents some relevant thoughts on global governance in
Complexity Mathematics, the EU and Global Governance, from The Globalist
http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=9363.<http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=9363>The
focus is on the EU but lessons for the Internet might be found there
as
well.

It starts:

I am not a mathematician, but I have learned that we must grapple with some
key concepts in order to prepare ourselves for the challenges that lie ahead
for our civilization — almost regardless of where we live. The first
important principle to get our arms around is this: The more we grow, the
more disorder we create.

While this may sound like some anarchical idea, it really is the
thermodynamic principle of entropy. Likewise, the more disorder that we have
around, the more variables we create. As a result, we constantly create more
complexity, because the definition of complexity is the interdependence of
the many variables involved.

 Managing this complexity requires a completely different mental and
scientific approach than the one we are used to. People tend to think in a
linear fashion, simply because that’s what we are used to doing.

 We humans are adept at, and used to, understanding three dimensions:
length, width and height. Why is this significant? Because that is what
typical linear mathematics captures. Once you surpass three variables in
mathematics, however, then you start entering complexity mathematics, which
is completely different.
...<http://www.theglobalist.com/storyid.aspx?StoryId=9363>

 Best,

Tom Lowenhaupt, Director
Connecting.nyc Inc.

P.S. We're sponsoring a discussion on governance of the .nyc TLD this
Thursday from 10-11 AM, New York time. It's using Google's Hangout feature
as follows:

What is the governance process for the .nyc TLD?

Is the multi-stakeholder model used by ICANN and the IGF appropriate for a
city TLD? (Typically thought of as business, government, civic society.) How
might this be adjusted for New York's needs?

We'll discuss the governance of other civic communication channels - public
access cable, radio, tv - and how a city TLD might be best governed.

The topic will be addressed at our regular Thursday "Tea and the .nyc TLD"
Hangout on Google +, for one hour between 10-11 AM.  Go here  --> Google+
Hangout<https://plus.google.com/_/notifications/ngemlink?path=%2F%3Fgpinv%3DdfX6OlVqIUg%3Al0RUKL1XqtM>
.



____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/a8dbe49d/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 17:51:47 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:51:47 +1200
Subject: [governance] Azerbaijan
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDi2qPcmBmMAanhHcV26JpU_M3Y2sAiKm2=nYWMYRYYAA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

I found out today that Azerbaijan is applying for the Eastern European seat
in the United Nations Security Council to be contested on 13 October, 2011
in the UN General Assembly. These are interesting developments.

Best Regards,


Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/76d240f2/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, 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


From mueller at syr.edu  Tue Oct 11 17:56:16 2011
From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 21:56:16 +0000
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
 <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
 <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>




The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to increase understanding.

[Milton L Mueller] I don't understand why this restriction applies to IGF but not, say, to IETF, ARIN, ICANN or APNIC. In other words, why can a bunch of people get together at an IETF meeting, come to an often difficult and painful agreement, and issue a standard, compliance with which is completely voluntary, and the IGF can't do the same? IGF has no binding legal or regulatory authority, unlike ICANN, so what is to be feared from allowing it to issue recommendations, as the WGIG did?

I think it incumbent upon those who want a new body or bodies to spell out EXACTLY in which areas there are gaps that need filling, how such a new body would fill those gaps (and only those gaps).
Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a power play.

[Milton L Mueller] Clearly it would be. But any attempt to tell the fairly balanced group at IGF that they cannot come to an agreement and issue recommendations is also a power play by status quo groups to keep others out of the game.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/3fddac47/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 18:02:25 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:02:25 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiA5ZQxSPPJr=WpgjSEWZwPG-vSmeLNjRz+OuOUirjmpSQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Carlos,

Please note that we are well capable for doing our own analysis and coming
to our own independent conclusions and if that conclusion or set of
inferences mirror others, then it is purely coincidental. It is not a
criticism against the writers of the IBSA Summary but against the issues
that were raised in the document.

Also when invitations are issued for comments and submissions, one has to be
prepared to hear views outside those of our own.

Best,

Sala

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:38 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> McTim,
>
> On 10/11/2011 03:43 AM, McTim wrote:
> > I'll bite.
> >
> > I too am not in favor of a poll at this time  (or at all, since our
> > decisions are supposed to be based on a consensus model).
> >
> [...]
> > The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to
> > increase understanding.
>
> It does already produce *some* outcomes, through the various results
> from workshops and similar parallel meetings. And the IGF might change,
> why not? Doesn't the "technical community" like changes in paradigms?
>
> [...]
> >
> > Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral
> > body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
> > power play.
> >
>
> Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
> grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say. There is not
> even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
> natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
> bodies etc etc. This was sparked by MM's furor expressed in an article
> in the IGP when first read the doc, and some people keep parroting this.
> Amazing!
>
> --c.a.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/81ef287d/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, 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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 18:03:41 2011
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:03:41 -0400
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <CAC0JwGMT19Fedy+0s35rkhPRu1QEwR0XXaaGB0N6160wCU75PA@mail.gmail.com>

+1

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 5:56 PM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to increase
> understanding.****
>
> * *
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] I don’t understand why this restriction applies to IGF
> but not, say, to IETF, ARIN, ICANN or APNIC. In other words, why can a bunch
> of people get together at an IETF meeting, come to an often difficult and
> painful agreement, and issue a standard, compliance with which is completely
> voluntary, and the IGF can’t do the same? IGF has no binding legal or
> regulatory authority, unlike ICANN, so what is to be feared from allowing it
> to issue recommendations, as the WGIG did? *****
>
> ** **
>
> I think it incumbent upon those who want a new body or bodies to spell out
> EXACTLY in which areas there are gaps that need filling, how such a new body
> would fill those gaps (and only those gaps).****
>
> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral body (as
> proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a power play.****
>
> ** **
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] Clearly it would be. But any attempt to tell the
> fairly balanced group at IGF that they cannot come to an agreement and issue
> recommendations is also a power play by status quo groups to keep others out
> of the game. *****
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111011/106de324/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Tue Oct 11 21:31:05 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:31:05 +0800
Subject: [governance] Voting for IGC Coordinator
In-Reply-To: <4E94535A.9070804@communisphere.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CALLeeatSMOxcBLjsbN=z-9sx=eFVV+ZShepL9u4Gqpcr_f-kgw@mail.gmail.com> <4E94535A.9070804@communisphere.com>
Message-ID: <A09FB844-1D12-4FA5-85A5-DFCF7268CB61@ciroap.org>

On 11/10/2011, at 10:31 PM, Thomas Lowenhaupt wrote:

> I just cast my vote for coordinator and wanted to express my gratitude to all the candidates for presenting us with a rich choice. 


Also, if anyone has not received a ballot and expected to, please contact me off-list.  Thanks!

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/0ee0f31f/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/0ee0f31f/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Oct 11 22:57:15 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:57:15 +1200
Subject: [governance] Certain default software settings can equate to
 :unfair or deceptive acts"
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCib7nu6806J7HQORnO5Wpe0pUFGKhSRqshaiAKzdH9qg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All

The United States Federal Trade Commission has decided that certain default
software settings can violate the law against “unfair or deceptive acts or
practices in or affecting commerce.”

See http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2011/10/frostwire.shtm

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/17f83d25/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, 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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 00:23:13 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 07:23:13 +0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxjT7GgB=tJhyNYpfj1ALLyqFrXOhbgsh94KR2i7pNdjSQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to increase
> understanding.****
>
> * *
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] I don’t understand why this restriction applies to IGF
> but not, say, to IETF, ARIN, ICANN or APNIC. In other words, why can a bunch
> of people get together at an IETF meeting, come to an often difficult and
> painful agreement, and issue a standard, compliance with which is completely
> voluntary,*
>


Do you mean an RFC? BCP?  These need to be published via the RFC Series
Editor process.


> * and the IGF can’t do the same? IGF has no binding legal or regulatory
> authority, unlike ICANN, so what is to be feared from allowing it to issue
> recommendations, as the WGIG did?*
>

creeping intergovernmentalism I think is to be feared.  I think the national
IGF could produce some kind of recommendation to a national authority.
 Regional and global IGFs producing rec would be less useful IMO.

If the global IGF had a body (plenary?) that could come to a consensus on an
issue, then some states would want that pushed to the UN GA for
ratification, with all that entails.

I think you also have a healthy skepticism about this type of outcome.


> * *****
>
> ** **
>
> I think it incumbent upon those who want a new body or bodies to spell out
> EXACTLY in which areas there are gaps that need filling, how such a new body
> would fill those gaps (and only those gaps).****
>
> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral body (as
> proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a power play.****
>
> ** **
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] Clearly it would be. But any attempt to tell the
> fairly balanced group at IGF that they cannot come to an agreement and issue
> recommendations is also a power play by status quo groups to keep others out
> of the game.*
>


or an attempt to hew to the TA mandate.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/32e5a02f/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, 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


From dogwallah at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 00:34:25 2011
From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 07:34:25 +0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
>
> McTim,
>
> On 10/11/2011 03:43 AM, McTim wrote:
> > I'll bite.
> >
> > I too am not in favor of a poll at this time  (or at all, since our
> > decisions are supposed to be based on a consensus model).
> >
> [...]
> > The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to
> > increase understanding.
>
> It does already produce *some* outcomes, through the various results
> from workshops and similar parallel meetings. And the IGF might change,
> why not? Doesn't the "technical community" like changes in paradigms?


While I don't speak for the technical community I do know that changes
in paradigms happen frequently in the tech community, witness the
growth of IPv4 "markets" as just one recent example.

>
> [...]
> >
> > Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral
> > body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
> > power play.
> >
>
> Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
> grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say.

This is the link that I have based my reaction to the proposal upon:
http://www.culturalivre.org.br/artigos/IBSA_recommendations_Internet_Governance.pdf

>
> There is not
> even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
> natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
> bodies etc etc.

I think you may have missed this bit then:

"iii. integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and
operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards
setting;"


>
> This was sparked by MM's furor expressed in an article
> in the IGP when first read the doc, and some people keep parroting this.

I rarely parrot MM ;-)


--
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, 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


From kabani at isd-rc.org  Wed Oct 12 01:39:45 2011
From: kabani at isd-rc.org (Asif Kabani)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:39:45 +0500
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <CAOzvoR0DCSDwNwAEmOj9ptmgcsqaTgXXEOeoaZZS7y-RqoxFDw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Friends,
Greetings,

Milton is right, I also agree with him that IGF cannot produce outcomes, It
is the forum to create synergies and as Milton said increase understanding
among various stakeholders.

Asif Kabani


On 12 October 2011 02:56, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

>  ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to increase
> understanding.****
>
> * *
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] I don’t understand why this restriction applies to IGF
> but not, say, to IETF, ARIN, ICANN or APNIC. In other words, why can a bunch
> of people get together at an IETF meeting, come to an often difficult and
> painful agreement, and issue a standard, compliance with which is completely
> voluntary, and the IGF can’t do the same? IGF has no binding legal or
> regulatory authority, unlike ICANN, so what is to be feared from allowing it
> to issue recommendations, as the WGIG did? *****
>
> ** **
>
> I think it incumbent upon those who want a new body or bodies to spell out
> EXACTLY in which areas there are gaps that need filling, how such a new body
> would fill those gaps (and only those gaps).****
>
> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral body (as
> proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a power play.****
>
> ** **
>
> *[Milton L Mueller] Clearly it would be. But any attempt to tell the
> fairly balanced group at IGF that they cannot come to an agreement and issue
> recommendations is also a power play by status quo groups to keep others out
> of the game. *****
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Asif Kabani
Email: kabani.asif at gmail.com


“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/8d231c4d/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, 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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Wed Oct 12 03:00:37 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:00:37 +0100
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
 <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
 <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>
Message-ID: <ZM7$xvYVsTlOFAoX@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message 
<855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD201F4E9 at SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>, at 
21:56:16 on Tue, 11 Oct 2011, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> writes
>[Milton L Mueller] I don?t understand why this restriction applies to 
>IGF but not, say, to IETF, ARIN, ICANN or APNIC. In other words, why 
>can a bunch of people get together at an IETF meeting, come to an often 
>difficult and painful agreement, and issue a standard, compliance with 
>which is completely voluntary, and the IGF can?t do the same? IGF has 
>no binding legal or regulatory authority, unlike ICANN, so what is to 
>be feared from allowing it to issue recommendations, as the WGIG did?

I've always understood that there are two sides to this.

Firstly, the IGF is sufficiently "close to the UN family" that people 
fear it could be become "too important to ignore" and be absorbed into 
the UN to become an intergovernmental institution, if it was producing 
recommendations with some traction.

(It doesn't really matter who is advantaged and disadvantaged by those 
recommendations, the risk it putting the collective head too far above 
the parapet)

Secondly, if it was producing negotiated outcomes (even if remaining 
"independent"), the process would rapidly move away from its current 
format of a relaxed place to meet and freely exchange ideas with people 
you wouldn't normally encounter, to a rather boring smoke-filled-room 
where people spend most of the week staring across the table at old 
adversaries, arguing over half a sentence in the output document.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From KovenRonald at aol.com  Wed Oct 12 05:20:36 2011
From: KovenRonald at aol.com (KovenRonald at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 05:20:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
Message-ID: <2ae9a.67d3bd18.3bc6b5e4@aol.com>

Dear All --

I don't see why IGF participants should have problems with IGF being the 
ultimate meeting-place for those interested in the development of the 
Internet, without serving as a decison-making body. 

Nobody seems to worry that Davos has no decision-making functions. It is 
nevertheless seen as an immensely useful forum.

Everyone knew from the start what the IGF ground rules were.

Rony Koven, World Press Freedom Committee
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/e33595e2/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 07:59:12 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 08:59:12 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <2ae9a.67d3bd18.3bc6b5e4@aol.com>
References: <2ae9a.67d3bd18.3bc6b5e4@aol.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK3XT-OMWmXQuRsFBQJf71ky5pxdGBKF071VWYAi3xT=Vw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Rony and all,

First, let's not mix-up topics. This thread began about Enhanced
cooperation. Not we are talking about IGF improvements. Two related, but
different things.

With regards to IGF improvements, I really think we should avoid a
false-dichtomy: binding X non biding IGF. There is no one in the Working
Group on IGF improvements (or even here on the list, as far as I could
notice) that would like to change the nature of the IGF in order for it to
make decisions.

What is being argued, briefly is:

1 - The outputs currently produced by the IGF (summary of the chair,
summaries by workshop organizers, IGF book) are valuable. However, they do
not serve as input for policy-making bodies, especially on the global level
 (ITU, UNESCO, WIPO, OECD, etc). Honestly, how many of us have stopped to
read workshop summaries?

2 - Because of that, many actors are proposing that the IGF produces more
concrete outcomes: that we map policy options (plural) that emerge from our
discussions. They should represent different views on an issue, but they
should also help to tackle a policy-problem by pointing out possible ways to
move forward. We have already started to move on that direction, when we
decided that main-sessions and workshops should be organized around
questions. These questions help us to stay focused on the problem and to
arrive in possible answers (policy options) for it.

3 - Improve communication: cluster and communicate the results of our
discussions (policy-options) to relevant bodies. Request for comments from
their side.

Given the fact the the meeting of the working group on IGF improvements is
coming soon, it would be great it we could debate proposals that really are
on the table. Please, let's not waste any more time with biding x
non-binding IGF.

For those who would like to have more information about the working group on
improvements, there is a website where all information is archived:
http://www.unctad.info/en/CstdWG/

I would also recommend reading the proposal that has been advanced by India,
since it is very comprehensive on the issue of outcomes. It is a good
starting point for debate. You may want to see, especially, the annex that
summarizes the main points in the document:
http://www.unctad.info/upload/CSTD-IGF/Contributions/M1/India.pdf

Best wishes,
Marília



On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:20 AM, <KovenRonald at aol.com> wrote:

> Dear All --
>
> I don't see why IGF participants should have problems with IGF being the
> ultimate meeting-place for those interested in the development of the
> Internet, without serving as a decison-making body.
>
> Nobody seems to worry that Davos has no decision-making functions. It is
> nevertheless seen as an immensely useful forum.
>
> Everyone knew from the start what the IGF ground rules were.
>
>
> Rony Koven, World Press Freedom Committee
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/8ebc9e7d/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 09:01:19 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 01:01:19 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK3XT-OMWmXQuRsFBQJf71ky5pxdGBKF071VWYAi3xT=Vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2ae9a.67d3bd18.3bc6b5e4@aol.com>
	<CACpVkK3XT-OMWmXQuRsFBQJf71ky5pxdGBKF071VWYAi3xT=Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiB0gX+xtng2jQQUgqW27yiEj7xEMsGWFqaiL0W=LYQOGg@mail.gmail.com>

This is what I call an interesting case of a "Kansas city shuffle".

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear Rony and all,
>
> First, let's not mix-up topics. This thread began about Enhanced
> cooperation. Not we are talking about IGF improvements. Two related, but
> different things.
>
> With regards to IGF improvements, I really think we should avoid a
> false-dichtomy: binding X non biding IGF. There is no one in the Working
> Group on IGF improvements (or even here on the list, as far as I could
> notice) that would like to change the nature of the IGF in order for it to
> make decisions.
>
> What is being argued, briefly is:
>
> 1 - The outputs currently produced by the IGF (summary of the chair,
> summaries by workshop organizers, IGF book) are valuable. However, they do
> not serve as input for policy-making bodies, especially on the global level
>  (ITU, UNESCO, WIPO, OECD, etc). Honestly, how many of us have stopped to
> read workshop summaries?
>
> 2 - Because of that, many actors are proposing that the IGF produces more
> concrete outcomes: that we map policy options (plural) that emerge from our
> discussions. They should represent different views on an issue, but they
> should also help to tackle a policy-problem by pointing out possible ways to
> move forward. We have already started to move on that direction, when we
> decided that main-sessions and workshops should be organized around
> questions. These questions help us to stay focused on the problem and to
> arrive in possible answers (policy options) for it.
>
> 3 - Improve communication: cluster and communicate the results of our
> discussions (policy-options) to relevant bodies. Request for comments from
> their side.
>
> Given the fact the the meeting of the working group on IGF improvements is
> coming soon, it would be great it we could debate proposals that really are
> on the table. Please, let's not waste any more time with biding x
> non-binding IGF.
>
> For those who would like to have more information about the working group
> on improvements, there is a website where all information is archived:
> http://www.unctad.info/en/CstdWG/
>
> I would also recommend reading the proposal that has been advanced by
> India, since it is very comprehensive on the issue of outcomes. It is a good
> starting point for debate. You may want to see, especially, the annex that
> summarizes the main points in the document:
> http://www.unctad.info/upload/CSTD-IGF/Contributions/M1/India.pdf
>
> Best wishes,
> Marília
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:20 AM, <KovenRonald at aol.com> wrote:
>
>> Dear All --
>>
>> I don't see why IGF participants should have problems with IGF being the
>> ultimate meeting-place for those interested in the development of the
>> Internet, without serving as a decison-making body.
>>
>> Nobody seems to worry that Davos has no decision-making functions. It is
>> nevertheless seen as an immensely useful forum.
>>
>> Everyone knew from the start what the IGF ground rules were.
>>
>>
>> Rony Koven, World Press Freedom Committee
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
>
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/67aa7d75/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Wed Oct 12 09:45:59 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:45:59 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>

Grande McTim,

On 10/12/2011 01:34 AM, McTim wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
>>
>> McTim,
>>
>> On 10/11/2011 03:43 AM, McTim wrote:
>>> I'll bite.
>>>
>>> I too am not in favor of a poll at this time  (or at all, since our
>>> decisions are supposed to be based on a consensus model).
>>>
>> [...]
>>> The IGF is not supposed to produce outcomes, but is supposed to
>>> increase understanding.
>>
>> It does already produce *some* outcomes, through the various results
>> from workshops and similar parallel meetings. And the IGF might change,
>> why not? Doesn't the "technical community" like changes in paradigms?
> 
> 
> While I don't speak for the technical community I do know that changes
> in paradigms happen frequently in the tech community, witness the
> growth of IPv4 "markets" as just one recent example.

Yes! This is the point! Why are some people of that community so afraid
to touch the "play lame" paradigm of the IGF, usually in tune with the
business community?

> 
>>
>> [...]
>>>
>>> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral
>>> body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
>>> power play.
>>>
>>
>> Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
>> grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say.
> 
> This is the link that I have based my reaction to the proposal upon:
> http://www.culturalivre.org.br/artigos/IBSA_recommendations_Internet_Governance.pdf
> 
>>
>> There is not
>> even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
>> natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
>> bodies etc etc.
> 
> I think you may have missed this bit then:
> 
> "iii. integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and
> operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards
> setting;"

No mention of the specific entities and forms in which anything would
effectively be done. Also, this "integration" or "oversight", in many
forms, has been part of the life of standards in any sector, much before
the Internet came to be, from screws to plugs to... And, of course,
being of entirely different natures and under distinct institutional
arrangements, this can mean anything. This is also why I insist we take
up the generalistic IBSA draft and try and propose changes, additions,
modifications etc as the three government reps are expecting from us.

> 
> 
>>
>> This was sparked by MM's furor expressed in an article
>> in the IGP when first read the doc, and some people keep parroting this.
> 
> I rarely parrot MM ;-)

:)

Cheers!

--c.a.
____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 09:46:07 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 10:46:07 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiB0gX+xtng2jQQUgqW27yiEj7xEMsGWFqaiL0W=LYQOGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2ae9a.67d3bd18.3bc6b5e4@aol.com>
	<CACpVkK3XT-OMWmXQuRsFBQJf71ky5pxdGBKF071VWYAi3xT=Vw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiB0gX+xtng2jQQUgqW27yiEj7xEMsGWFqaiL0W=LYQOGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK0bMJ3eKa=obALcvVdY_Z+JTic=mKd9TXzC9oSW5-d1KA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> This is what I call an interesting case of a "Kansas city shuffle".
>
>
Hi Sala, sorry, I am unfamiliar with this reference.
What wikipedia told me did not help much:

Kansas City shuffle is a song by jazz pianist Bennie
Moten<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bennie_Moten>.
It was recorded in 1926 in Chicago <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago>,
Illinois <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois> and released on the
Victor<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RCA_Records> record
label. The song refers to an advanced form of confidence
game<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_game> employing
misdirection, subterfuge, and playing on the
"mark<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_(victim)>'s"
arrogance and/or self-loathing. The relevance to a direction stated at the
beginning of a situation has no bearing to the outcome.


Therefore, if it was an important reaction to my message, I would like to
ask you to elaborate.

Thanks :)
Marília


> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Marilia Maciel <mariliamaciel at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Dear Rony and all,
>>
>> First, let's not mix-up topics. This thread began about Enhanced
>> cooperation. Not we are talking about IGF improvements. Two related, but
>> different things.
>>
>> With regards to IGF improvements, I really think we should avoid a
>> false-dichtomy: binding X non biding IGF. There is no one in the Working
>> Group on IGF improvements (or even here on the list, as far as I could
>> notice) that would like to change the nature of the IGF in order for it to
>> make decisions.
>>
>> What is being argued, briefly is:
>>
>> 1 - The outputs currently produced by the IGF (summary of the chair,
>> summaries by workshop organizers, IGF book) are valuable. However, they do
>> not serve as input for policy-making bodies, especially on the global level
>>  (ITU, UNESCO, WIPO, OECD, etc). Honestly, how many of us have stopped to
>> read workshop summaries?
>>
>> 2 - Because of that, many actors are proposing that the IGF produces more
>> concrete outcomes: that we map policy options (plural) that emerge from our
>> discussions. They should represent different views on an issue, but they
>> should also help to tackle a policy-problem by pointing out possible ways to
>> move forward. We have already started to move on that direction, when we
>> decided that main-sessions and workshops should be organized around
>> questions. These questions help us to stay focused on the problem and to
>> arrive in possible answers (policy options) for it.
>>
>> 3 - Improve communication: cluster and communicate the results of our
>> discussions (policy-options) to relevant bodies. Request for comments from
>> their side.
>>
>> Given the fact the the meeting of the working group on IGF improvements is
>> coming soon, it would be great it we could debate proposals that really are
>> on the table. Please, let's not waste any more time with biding x
>> non-binding IGF.
>>
>> For those who would like to have more information about the working group
>> on improvements, there is a website where all information is archived:
>> http://www.unctad.info/en/CstdWG/
>>
>> I would also recommend reading the proposal that has been advanced by
>> India, since it is very comprehensive on the issue of outcomes. It is a good
>> starting point for debate. You may want to see, especially, the annex that
>> summarizes the main points in the document:
>> http://www.unctad.info/upload/CSTD-IGF/Contributions/M1/India.pdf
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Marília
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 6:20 AM, <KovenRonald at aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear All --
>>>
>>> I don't see why IGF participants should have problems with IGF being the
>>> ultimate meeting-place for those interested in the development of the
>>> Internet, without serving as a decison-making body.
>>>
>>> Nobody seems to worry that Davos has no decision-making functions. It is
>>> nevertheless seen as an immensely useful forum.
>>>
>>> Everyone knew from the start what the IGF ground rules were.
>>>
>>>
>>> Rony Koven, World Press Freedom Committee
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>> FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Center for Technology and Society
>> Getulio Vargas Foundation
>> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/ef1338db/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Wed Oct 12 10:56:02 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:56:02 +0200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <588A54BB-F989-4CF9-806F-3C87BA76BAE4@uzh.ch>

Hi Carlos

On Oct 12, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:

>>>> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral
>>>> body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
>>>> power play.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
>>> grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say.
>> 
>> This is the link that I have based my reaction to the proposal upon:
>> http://www.culturalivre.org.br/artigos/IBSA_recommendations_Internet_Governance.pdf
>> 
>>> 
>>> There is not
>>> even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
>>> natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
>>> bodies etc etc.
>> 
>> I think you may have missed this bit then:
>> 
>> "iii. integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and
>> operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards
>> setting;"
> 
> No mention of the specific entities and forms in which anything would
> effectively be done.

So just to be clear then, are you saying that by "the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet," the IBSA document does NOT mean ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc?  If so this would have been good to know when we were debating this very point in the CIR main session in Nairobi, it'd have relaxed some of the palpable clenching in the room...

> Also, this "integration" or "oversight", in many
> forms, has been part of the life of standards in any sector, much before
> the Internet came to be, from screws to plugs to... And, of course,
> being of entirely different natures and under distinct institutional
> arrangements, this can mean anything. This is also why I insist we take
> up the generalistic IBSA draft and try and propose changes, additions,
> modifications etc as the three government reps are expecting from us.


Ok, I'll take the bait and start...

From the Rio recommendations paper, I suggest replacing:

"In order to prevent fragmentation of the Internet, avoid disjointed policy making, increase participation and ensure stability and smooth functioning of the Internet, an appropriate body is urgently required in the UN system to coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global public policies pertaining to the Internet."

with

"In order to prevent fragmentation of the Internet, avoid disjointed policy making, increase participation and ensure stability and smooth functioning of the Internet, significantly increased peer-to-peer multistakeholder dialogue and collaboration is required on those issues that are agreed to require integrated global public policies."

By extension, I would strike:

"It was further agreed that the new body should inter alia:
be located within the UN system;
be tasked to develop and establish international public policies with a view to ensuring coordination and coherence in cross-cutting Internet-related global issues;
integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting;
address developmental issues related to the internet;
undertake arbitration and dispute resolution, where necessary, and
be responsible for crisis management."
I would then replace

"The meeting agreed to prepare a detailed proposal outlining the modalities of the proposed new global Internet Governance body for consideration and approval of the IBSA Summit, scheduled to be held on October 18, 2011 in Durban, South Africa.  This proposal could thereafter be presented at the 66th UN General Assembly in New York…in December 2010 [sic]"

with

"The IBSA governments commit to engaging the global community in open, peer-to-peer multistakeholder dialogue in order to a) identify concrete, specific issues on which action may be required, and b) explore new and innovative forms of multistakeholder collaboration that could be used to address such issues.   Such a dialogue shall be commenced online with an eye toward assembling a representative multistakeholder drafting team that would prepare a written proposal for consideration at the 2012 Internet Governance Forum."

[Re: the above forms, one possible idea I raised in my workshop, on which there's been some subsequent discussion off-list, is to generalize elements of the AoC as a global framework.  Would be interested in coming back to that down the line…]

Finally, I would replace

"As a first step, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet Governance and Development Observatory at the earliest. The Observatory should be tasked to monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries."

"As a first step, IBSA governments agree to work with interested stakeholders from around the world to establish an Internet Governance and Development Observatory. The Observatory should be tasked with monitoring trends, aggregating ideas and information, and providing regular updates and analyses, with particular attention to the concerns of developing country governments and stakeholders.   Such an observatory could be institutionally nested within the Internet Governance Forum."

BTW I really like the observatory piece…as you may recall, Wolfgang and I included such a thing in the global governance section of the CS declaration at the 2003 WSIS summit in Geneva.  It was also embodied in some of our 2004 proposals for what became the IGF...

Hope this is helpful,

Bill

PS: I strongly agreed with your NCSG list posting :-)




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/a613e132/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Wed Oct 12 11:15:35 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:15:35 -0300
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <588A54BB-F989-4CF9-806F-3C87BA76BAE4@uzh.ch>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca> <588A54BB-F989-4CF9-806F-3C87BA76BAE4@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4E95AF17.6090604@cafonso.ca>

Now, this really helps, Bill! Excellent. Let us see how we can advance
in this way.

frt rgds

--c.a.

On 10/12/2011 11:56 AM, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Carlos
> 
> On Oct 12, 2011, at 3:45 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> 
>>>>> Clearly, a takeover of ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc by a multilateral
>>>>> body (as proposed by IBSA) will not fill any gaps.  It's just a
>>>>> power play.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now, this is really news to me, and I think I know English enough to
>>>> grasp what the by now famous IBSA doc said or did not say.
>>>
>>> This is the link that I have based my reaction to the proposal upon:
>>> http://www.culturalivre.org.br/artigos/IBSA_recommendations_Internet_Governance.pdf
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is not
>>>> even mention of any of these entities, which are of entirely different
>>>> natures in scope, mandate, incidence, decision-making, relation to gov
>>>> bodies etc etc.
>>>
>>> I think you may have missed this bit then:
>>>
>>> "iii. integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and
>>> operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards
>>> setting;"
>>
>> No mention of the specific entities and forms in which anything would
>> effectively be done. 
> 
> So just to be clear then, are you saying that by "the bodies responsible
> for technical and operational functioning of the Internet," the IBSA
> document does NOT mean ICANN/IETF/W3C/RIRs, etc?  If so this would have
> been good to know when we were debating this very point in the CIR main
> session in Nairobi, it'd have relaxed some of the palpable clenching in
> the room...
> 
>> Also, this "integration" or "oversight", in many
>> forms, has been part of the life of standards in any sector, much before
>> the Internet came to be, from screws to plugs to... And, of course,
>> being of entirely different natures and under distinct institutional
>> arrangements, this can mean anything. This is also why I insist we take
>> up the generalistic IBSA draft and try and propose changes, additions,
>> modifications etc as the three government reps are expecting from us.
> 
> Ok, I'll take the bait and start...
> 
> From the Rio recommendations paper, I suggest replacing:
> 
> "In order to prevent fragmentation of the Internet, avoid disjointed
> policy making, increase participation and ensure stability and smooth
> functioning of the Internet, an appropriate body is urgently required
> in the UN system to coordinate and evolve coherent and integrated global
> public policies pertaining to the Internet."
> 
> with
> 
> "In order to prevent fragmentation of the Internet, avoid disjointed
> policy making, increase participation and ensure stability and smooth
> functioning of the Internet, significantly increased peer-to-peer
> multistakeholder dialogue and collaboration is required on those issues
> that are agreed to require integrated global public policies."
> 
> By extension, I would strike:
> 
> "It was further agreed that the new body should inter alia:
> 
>     * be located within the UN system;
>     * be tasked to develop and establish international public policies
>       with a view to ensuring coordination and coherence in
>       cross-cutting Internet-related global issues;
>     * integrate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and
>       operational functioning of the Internet, including global
>       standards setting;
>     * address developmental issues related to the internet;
>     * undertake arbitration and dispute resolution, where necessary, and
>     * be responsible for crisis management."
> 
> I would then replace
> 
> "The meeting agreed to prepare a detailed proposal outlining the
> modalities of the proposed new global Internet Governance body for
> consideration and approval of the IBSA Summit, scheduled to be held on
> October 18, 2011 in Durban, South Africa.  This proposal could
> thereafter be presented at the 66th UN General Assembly in New York…in
> December 2010 [sic]"
> 
> with
> 
> "The IBSA governments commit to engaging the global community in
> open, peer-to-peer multistakeholder dialogue in order to a) identify
> concrete, specific issues on which action may be required, and b)
> explore new and innovative forms of multistakeholder collaboration that
> could be used to address such issues.   Such a dialogue shall be
> commenced online with an eye toward assembling a
> representative multistakeholder drafting team that would prepare a
> written proposal for consideration at the 2012 Internet Governance Forum."
> 
> [Re: the above forms, one possible idea I raised in my workshop, on
> which there's been some subsequent discussion off-list, is to generalize
> elements of the AoC as a global framework.  Would be interested in
> coming back to that down the line…]
> 
> Finally, I would replace
> 
> "As a first step, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
> Governance and Development Observatory at the earliest. The Observatory
> should be tasked to monitor developments on global Internet Governance
> and provide regular updates and analyses from the perspective of
> developing countries."
> 
> "As a first step, IBSA governments agree to work with interested
> stakeholders from around the world to establish an Internet Governance
> and Development Observatory. The Observatory should be tasked with
> monitoring trends, aggregating ideas and information, and providing
> regular updates and analyses, with particular attention to the concerns
> of developing country governments and stakeholders.   Such an
> observatory could be institutionally nested within the Internet
> Governance Forum."
> 
> BTW I really like the observatory piece…as you may recall, Wolfgang and
> I included such a thing in the global governance section of the CS
> declaration at the 2003 WSIS summit in Geneva.  It was also embodied in
> some of our 2004 proposals for what became the IGF...
> 
> Hope this is helpful,
> 
> Bill
> 
> PS: I strongly agreed with your NCSG list posting :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Wed Oct 12 11:18:45 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:18:45 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
References:  <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
 <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
 <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
 <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi everybody
 
it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic discussion about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to keep the Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights oriented and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that governments have equal rights in determining Internet related public policy issues on a global level.
 
2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda, which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still open. 
 
>From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves. We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general policy recommendations and legal actions. 
 
The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO, USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression. UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI. 
 
And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different discussion cultures on the governmental level.
 
What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
 
1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF? a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)? 
 
2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the membership, the budget, the oversight? 
 
3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT, intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security, crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those policies. 
 
4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism. There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the UN?
 
Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
 
Wolfgang

____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Wed Oct 12 11:35:31 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:35:31 +0200
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch>

Hi

On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:

> The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been scheduled for 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will be open only for participants of the WG, but as the chair has changed, I think it could be useful to write to him and ask about the possibility of allowing observers in the room. 

Apparently the CSTD secretariat believes this to be a very highly sensitive and political process that should be restricted to members and existing participants.  As such, a letter just from CS seems unlikely to have much impact.  If, however, there was a joint letter with the technical and business communities asking for an acceptably sized peanut gallery of silent observers, and some member governments expressed support for the principle, we might get somewhere.  Perhaps our coordinators could reach out to ISOC and ICC and see if there'd be any interest?  The meeting's less than three weeks off, so anything would have to happen soon…

Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/dd35a117/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, 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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 11:49:27 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:49:27 -0300
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>

+1

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch>wrote:

> Hi
>
>
> On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>
> The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been scheduled for
> 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will be open only for
> participants of the WG, but as the chair has changed, I think it could be
> useful to write to him and ask about the possibility of allowing observers
> in the room.
>
>
> Apparently the CSTD secretariat believes this to be a very highly sensitive
> and political process that should be restricted to members and existing
> participants.  As such, a letter just from CS seems unlikely to have much
> impact.  If, however, there was a joint letter with the technical and
> business communities asking for an acceptably sized peanut gallery of silent
> observers, and some member governments expressed support for the principle,
> we might get somewhere.  Perhaps our coordinators could reach out to ISOC
> and ICC and see if there'd be any interest?  The meeting's less than three
> weeks off, so anything would have to happen soon…
>
> Bill
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/6ca3afb6/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, 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


From anriette at apc.org  Wed Oct 12 13:04:22 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:04:22 +0200
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>	<E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch> <CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E95C896.4020501@apc.org>

I think it would be good go suggest that some Geneva-based CS attend.
Unfortunately I will not be able to attend as there is no financial
support available and APC does not any project funds that can go towards
covering my participation.

Marilia, Parminder, will you be there?

Anriette


On 12/10/11 17:49, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> +1
> 
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch
> <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi
> 
> 
>     On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> 
>>     The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been
>>     scheduled for 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will
>>     be open only for participants of the WG, but as the chair has
>>     changed, I think it could be useful to write to him and ask about
>>     the possibility of allowing observers in the room. 
> 
>     Apparently the CSTD secretariat believes this to be a very highly
>     sensitive and political process that should be restricted to members
>     and existing participants.  As such, a letter just from CS seems
>     unlikely to have much impact.  If, however, there was a joint letter
>     with the technical and business communities asking for an acceptably
>     sized peanut gallery of silent observers, and some member
>     governments expressed support for the principle, we might get
>     somewhere.  Perhaps our coordinators could reach out to ISOC and ICC
>     and see if there'd be any interest?  The meeting's less than three
>     weeks off, so anything would have to happen soon…
> 
>     Bill
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
> 
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Wed Oct 12 13:15:42 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 14:15:42 -0300
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <4E95C896.4020501@apc.org>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch>
	<CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E95C896.4020501@apc.org>
Message-ID: <CACpVkK3GeDELP6-G2=RVPRdvT5FJ6-X-v-n=GXS1gpngOXs0gw@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Anriette,

These is unfortunate news... I hope there is still some other way out...

I think I will be there, although the issue of the ticket is still not
resolved: CSTD Secretariat agreed to cover expenses, but the booking is
taking longer than expected and as far as I understand their internal
deadline to buy the ticket has already passed. Hope to have a more clear
position before Friday.

Marília

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>wrote:

> I think it would be good go suggest that some Geneva-based CS attend.
> Unfortunately I will not be able to attend as there is no financial
> support available and APC does not any project funds that can go towards
> covering my participation.
>
> Marilia, Parminder, will you be there?
>
> Anriette
>
>
> On 12/10/11 17:49, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch
> > <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>> wrote:
> >
> >     Hi
> >
> >
> >     On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> >
> >>     The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been
> >>     scheduled for 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will
> >>     be open only for participants of the WG, but as the chair has
> >>     changed, I think it could be useful to write to him and ask about
> >>     the possibility of allowing observers in the room.
> >
> >     Apparently the CSTD secretariat believes this to be a very highly
> >     sensitive and political process that should be restricted to members
> >     and existing participants.  As such, a letter just from CS seems
> >     unlikely to have much impact.  If, however, there was a joint letter
> >     with the technical and business communities asking for an acceptably
> >     sized peanut gallery of silent observers, and some member
> >     governments expressed support for the principle, we might get
> >     somewhere.  Perhaps our coordinators could reach out to ISOC and ICC
> >     and see if there'd be any interest?  The meeting's less than three
> >     weeks off, so anything would have to happen soon…
> >
> >     Bill
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> > FGV Direito Rio
> >
> > Center for Technology and Society
> > Getulio Vargas Foundation
> > Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111012/5d3723d3/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, 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


From anriette at apc.org  Wed Oct 12 13:53:20 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 19:53:20 +0200
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CACpVkK3GeDELP6-G2=RVPRdvT5FJ6-X-v-n=GXS1gpngOXs0gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>	<E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch>	<CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>	<4E95C896.4020501@apc.org> <CACpVkK3GeDELP6-G2=RVPRdvT5FJ6-X-v-n=GXS1gpngOXs0gw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E95D410.8040206@apc.org>

Well.. at least they have some support for civil society. They told me
they had none. But this might be because they supported my travel to
CSTD earlier this year.

Anyway.. I will participate remotely.

Anriette



On 12/10/11 19:15, Marilia Maciel wrote:
> Hello Anriette,
> 
> These is unfortunate news... I hope there is still some other way out...
> 
> I think I will be there, although the issue of the ticket is still not
> resolved: CSTD Secretariat agreed to cover expenses, but the booking is
> taking longer than expected and as far as I understand their internal
> deadline to buy the ticket has already passed. Hope to have a more clear
> position before Friday.
> 
> Marília
> 
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
> 
>     I think it would be good go suggest that some Geneva-based CS attend.
>     Unfortunately I will not be able to attend as there is no financial
>     support available and APC does not any project funds that can go towards
>     covering my participation.
> 
>     Marilia, Parminder, will you be there?
> 
>     Anriette
> 
> 
>     On 12/10/11 17:49, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>     > +1
>     >
>     > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM, William Drake
>     <william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
>     > <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     Hi
>     >
>     >
>     >     On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>     >
>     >>     The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been
>     >>     scheduled for 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will
>     >>     be open only for participants of the WG, but as the chair has
>     >>     changed, I think it could be useful to write to him and ask about
>     >>     the possibility of allowing observers in the room.
>     >
>     >     Apparently the CSTD secretariat believes this to be a very highly
>     >     sensitive and political process that should be restricted to
>     members
>     >     and existing participants.  As such, a letter just from CS seems
>     >     unlikely to have much impact.  If, however, there was a joint
>     letter
>     >     with the technical and business communities asking for an
>     acceptably
>     >     sized peanut gallery of silent observers, and some member
>     >     governments expressed support for the principle, we might get
>     >     somewhere.  Perhaps our coordinators could reach out to ISOC
>     and ICC
>     >     and see if there'd be any interest?  The meeting's less than three
>     >     weeks off, so anything would have to happen soon…
>     >
>     >     Bill
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > --
>     > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>     > FGV Direito Rio
>     >
>     > Center for Technology and Society
>     > Getulio Vargas Foundation
>     > Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
> 
>     --
>     ------------------------------------------------------
>     anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org <mailto:anriette at apc.org>
>     executive director, association for progressive communications
>     www.apc.org <http://www.apc.org>
>     po box 29755, melville 2109
>     south africa
>     tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 <tel:%2B27%2011%20726%201692>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     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, 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
> FGV Direito Rio
> 
> Center for Technology and Society
> Getulio Vargas Foundation
> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
____________________________________________________________
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


From iza at anr.org  Wed Oct 12 22:50:56 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:50:56 +0900
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <4E95D410.8040206@apc.org>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch> <CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E95C896.4020501@apc.org> <CACpVkK3GeDELP6-G2=RVPRdvT5FJ6-X-v-n=GXS1gpngOXs0gw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E95D410.8040206@apc.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKig=y8b9zb0akCmqdrf6tXwZyuAg+hf0U04mAOcenyj0Q@mail.gmail.com>

I will go to Geneva, though there is no funding support from CSTD since
I am from developed country. I have squeezed my research budget to
cover the extra expenses.

Anyway, yes, I would propose CSTD WG Chair to allow observers
to stay in the same room, non-contributing, except when Chair
allows, maybe. As for ISOC and ICC, it's worth to try, I agree.


izumi



2011/10/13 Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>:
> Well.. at least they have some support for civil society. They told me
> they had none. But this might be because they supported my travel to
> CSTD earlier this year.
>
> Anyway.. I will participate remotely.
>
> Anriette
>
>
>
> On 12/10/11 19:15, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>> Hello Anriette,
>>
>> These is unfortunate news... I hope there is still some other way out...
>>
>> I think I will be there, although the issue of the ticket is still not
>> resolved: CSTD Secretariat agreed to cover expenses, but the booking is
>> taking longer than expected and as far as I understand their internal
>> deadline to buy the ticket has already passed. Hope to have a more clear
>> position before Friday.
>>
>> Marília
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:04 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org
>> <mailto:anriette at apc.org>> wrote:
>>
>>     I think it would be good go suggest that some Geneva-based CS attend.
>>     Unfortunately I will not be able to attend as there is no financial
>>     support available and APC does not any project funds that can go towards
>>     covering my participation.
>>
>>     Marilia, Parminder, will you be there?
>>
>>     Anriette
>>
>>
>>     On 12/10/11 17:49, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>>     > +1
>>     >
>>     > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:35 PM, William Drake
>>     <william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>
>>     > <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch <mailto:william.drake at uzh.ch>>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >     Hi
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >     On Oct 6, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Marilia Maciel wrote:
>>     >
>>     >>     The next meeting of the CSTD WG for IGF improvement has been
>>     >>     scheduled for 31 Oct until 02 Nov, in Geneva. Apparently, it will
>>     >>     be open only for participants of the WG, but as the chair has
>>     >>     changed, I think it could be useful to write to him and ask about
>>     >>     the possibility of allowing observers in the room.
>>     >
>>     >     Apparently the CSTD secretariat believes this to be a very highly
>>     >     sensitive and political process that should be restricted to
>>     members
>>     >     and existing participants.  As such, a letter just from CS seems
>>     >     unlikely to have much impact.  If, however, there was a joint
>>     letter
>>     >     with the technical and business communities asking for an
>>     acceptably
>>     >     sized peanut gallery of silent observers, and some member
>>     >     governments expressed support for the principle, we might get
>>     >     somewhere.  Perhaps our coordinators could reach out to ISOC
>>     and ICC
>>     >     and see if there'd be any interest?  The meeting's less than three
>>     >     weeks off, so anything would have to happen soon…
>>     >
>>     >     Bill
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > --
>>     > Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>>     > FGV Direito Rio
>>     >
>>     > Center for Technology and Society
>>     > Getulio Vargas Foundation
>>     > Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>>
>>     --
>>     ------------------------------------------------------
>>     anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org <mailto:anriette at apc.org>
>>     executive director, association for progressive communications
>>     www.apc.org <http://www.apc.org>
>>     po box 29755, melville 2109
>>     south africa
>>     tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 <tel:%2B27%2011%20726%201692>
>>     ____________________________________________________________
>>     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, 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
>> FGV Direito Rio
>>
>> Center for Technology and Society
>> Getulio Vargas Foundation
>> Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>



-- 
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<
          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
                              www.anr.org
____________________________________________________________
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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Thu Oct 13 01:17:55 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:17:55 +0100
Subject: [governance] Next CSTD WG meeting scheduled
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKig=y8b9zb0akCmqdrf6tXwZyuAg+hf0U04mAOcenyj0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0V110WLPjuYAZsY9msQVHdRh+w15GapZo1QAgmR9uHJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<E92E1285-D8CA-4523-94BB-00E70E6D14C6@uzh.ch>
	<CACpVkK0C0DUbfVTgY3469qmbALcxQCRbRH5qP7b3JQ_rs2ySuw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E95C896.4020501@apc.org>
	<CACpVkK3GeDELP6-G2=RVPRdvT5FJ6-X-v-n=GXS1gpngOXs0gw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E95D410.8040206@apc.org>
	<CA+YNoKig=y8b9zb0akCmqdrf6tXwZyuAg+hf0U04mAOcenyj0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALLeeasmRsJqi4REoqKLzq+ns+L7Rhjbfsm4Z_yTbC1bA1hUsg@mail.gmail.com>

+1

Sea

On 13 Oct 2011 03:51, "Izumi AIZU" <iza at anr.org> wrote:

I will go to Geneva, though there is no funding support from CSTD since
I am from developed country. I have squeezed my research budget to
cover the extra expenses.

Anyway, yes, I would propose CSTD WG Chair to allow observers
to stay in the same room, non-contributing, except when Chair
allows, maybe. As for ISOC and ICC, it's worth to try, I agree.


izumi



2011/10/13 Anriette Esterhuysen <anriette at apc.org>:

> Well.. at least they have some support for civil society. They told me
> they had none. But this m...
--
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<
          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
                              www.anr.org

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscrib...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/71623ce2/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Thu Oct 13 01:16:35 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 06:16:35 +0100
Subject: AW: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CALLeeatiOsU66d81TiJ1TB1WinoSmd-0LSfOdgKZoU5yHfaTvQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Excellent analysis from Wolfgang and others!

Hope we can assemble very good statement from the inputs so far?

Dr. Jeremy looking up for a daft statement.

Thank you.

Sea

On 12 Oct 2011 16:35, "&quot;Kleinwächter, Wolfgang&quot;" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:

Hi everybody

it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic discussion
about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to keep the
Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights oriented
and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that governments have
equal rights in determining Internet related public policy issues on a
global level.

2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions which
have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda, which
included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A number of
the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A number of
issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still open.

From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic
approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in
this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with
governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves.
We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general
policy recommendations and legal actions.

The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO,
USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous
national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different
and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a
principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by
another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As
member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but
in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It
supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights
aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete
cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports
freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in
the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression.
UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce
drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.

And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included
civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the
very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last
minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in
particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face
a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical
interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder
debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the
Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different
discussion cultures on the governmental level.

What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more
systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:

1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of
Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for
"good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as
it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a
Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by
governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second
question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF?
a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?

2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The
question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing
governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define
what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve
existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such
a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the
membership, the budget, the oversight?

3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like social
networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT,
intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security,
crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of
the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific
problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political
recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should
do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue
before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a
case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different
issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed
system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those
policies.

4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism. There
new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the
traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen
transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have
ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue
probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a
mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the
first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so
impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new
territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a
multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the
UN?

Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group but
CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward to
make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the Shanghai
project) was a good starter. More has to be done.

Wolfgang


____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscri...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/e652e15a/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Thu Oct 13 02:46:01 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:46:01 +0800
Subject: AW: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeatiOsU66d81TiJ1TB1WinoSmd-0LSfOdgKZoU5yHfaTvQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <CALLeeatiOsU66d81TiJ1TB1WinoSmd-0LSfOdgKZoU5yHfaTvQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4E968929.9030200@ciroap.org>

On 13/10/11 13:16, Sonigitu Ekpe wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Excellent analysis from Wolfgang and others!
>
> Hope we can assemble very good statement from the inputs so far?
>
> Dr. Jeremy looking up for a daft statement.
>

I have already re-sent our last statement on enhanced cooperation to
Romulo Neves of Brazil who promised to share it with his colleagues from
South Africa and India ahead of the meeting.  But I felt that there was
not strong support for a new statement yet, such as the one that Sala
had suggested we write after holding a straw poll (or in her words
"white monkey" poll, which is a new expression for me!).  Given the
upcoming change in coordinators, this is another reason why it may now
be best to wait until after the IBSA meeting before issuing a new statement.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international
movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
_www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>_
_Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>_

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>. Don't
print this email unless necessary.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/8cdd4df8/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3762 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/8cdd4df8/attachment.bin>

From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 03:16:08 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 19:16:08 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiARf-+UXbRcik75hGYNnHCoLWM9oPw2RVbx4WofuGyGaA@mail.gmail.com>

This is excellent. Marilia, ignore my comment on the KCS. Following
Professor Wolfgang's email, I would like to submit my perspective on the
matter. I agree that we should ask concrete questions before making policy
recommendation. I think also that people should dialogue on what those
questions should be. I agree that a more holistic approach is needed. My
illustrations are not visible in text so I am attaching my comments in a
document.

Whilst I may not agree with everything in it, I still think that  the IBSA
should be commended for stimulating the dialogue and discussions. My views
are attached.

Best Regards,
Sala


2011/10/13 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

> Hi everybody
>
> it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic discussion
> about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to keep the
> Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights oriented
> and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that governments have
> equal rights in determining Internet related public policy issues on a
> global level.
>
> 2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions
> which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda,
> which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A
> number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A
> number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still
> open.
>
> From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic
> approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in
> this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with
> governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves.
> We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general
> policy recommendations and legal actions.
>
> The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO,
> USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous
> national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different
> and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a
> principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by
> another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As
> member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but
> in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It
> supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights
> aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete
> cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports
> freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in
> the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression.
> UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce
> drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.
>
> And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included
> civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the
> very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last
> minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in
> particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face
> a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical
> interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder
> debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the
> Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different
> discussion cultures on the governmental level.
>
> What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more
> systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
>
> 1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of
> Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for
> "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as
> it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a
> Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by
> governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second
> question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF?
> a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?
>
> 2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The
> question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing
> governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define
> what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve
> existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such
> a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the
> membership, the budget, the oversight?
>
> 3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like
> social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT,
> intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security,
> crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of
> the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific
> problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political
> recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should
> do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue
> before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a
> case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different
> issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed
> system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those
> policies.
>
> 4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
> There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the
> traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen
> transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have
> ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue
> probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a
> mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the
> first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so
> impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new
> territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a
> multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the
> UN?
>
> Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group
> but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward
> to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the
> Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/aee56211/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Email to IGC List dated 13th October.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 179605 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/aee56211/attachment.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 02:52:54 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 18:52:54 +1200
Subject: AW: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E968929.9030200@ciroap.org>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CALLeeatiOsU66d81TiJ1TB1WinoSmd-0LSfOdgKZoU5yHfaTvQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E968929.9030200@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCVWSboHH8vOdMqQRM4oHmdVf9OLbtZ64m9tN6XePbMXg@mail.gmail.com>

I meant to say "Survey Monkey":
http://help.surveymonkey.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/17/~/use-a-white-label-domain-of-www.research.net.-with-a-platinum-plan.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> **
> On 13/10/11 13:16, Sonigitu Ekpe wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Excellent analysis from Wolfgang and others!
>
> Hope we can assemble very good statement from the inputs so far?
>
> Dr. Jeremy looking up for a daft statement.
>
>
> I have already re-sent our last statement on enhanced cooperation to Romulo
> Neves of Brazil who promised to share it with his colleagues from South
> Africa and India ahead of the meeting.  But I felt that there was not strong
> support for a new statement yet, such as the one that Sala had suggested we
> write after holding a straw poll (or in her words "white monkey" poll, which
> is a new expression for me!).  Given the upcoming change in coordinators,
> this is another reason why it may now be best to wait until after the IBSA
> meeting before issuing a new statement.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/22911cf9/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 06:27:57 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:27:57 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiARf-+UXbRcik75hGYNnHCoLWM9oPw2RVbx4WofuGyGaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CAJwbTiARf-+UXbRcik75hGYNnHCoLWM9oPw2RVbx4WofuGyGaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBNcuxGk8_4wP=OdDufzLgOa6jYX_6Lm_np48kB1f4t6Q@mail.gmail.com>

Also as I write this the ITU Council meeting, some members are tweeting
that


drafting group to meet later today to discuss ToR for the dedicated group on
international internet-related public policy issues

Bulgaria: Along with USA, offers to participate in drafting group to
finalise terms of reference for WG on Net Public Policy

USA: Asks if it would be useful if ITU Sector Members be invited to join the
WG on Net Public Policy

Mali: Supports Canada's proposal that all stakeholders be involved in open
consultations for WG on Net Public Policy

Brazil: open consultations for Working Group on Net Public Policy a great
way to engage with all stakeholders

ITU Council discussing proposal by Saudi Arabia to turn Internet Dedicated
Group into Working Group as mandated by

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> This is excellent. Marilia, ignore my comment on the KCS. Following
> Professor Wolfgang's email, I would like to submit my perspective on the
> matter. I agree that we should ask concrete questions before making policy
> recommendation. I think also that people should dialogue on what those
> questions should be. I agree that a more holistic approach is needed. My
> illustrations are not visible in text so I am attaching my comments in a
> document.
>
> Whilst I may not agree with everything in it, I still think that  the IBSA
> should be commended for stimulating the dialogue and discussions. My views
> are attached.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sala
>
>
> 2011/10/13 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
> wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>
>> Hi everybody
>>
>> it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic
>> discussion about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to
>> keep the Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights
>> oriented and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that
>> governments have equal rights in determining Internet related public policy
>> issues on a global level.
>>
>> 2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions
>> which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda,
>> which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A
>> number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A
>> number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still
>> open.
>>
>> From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic
>> approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in
>> this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with
>> governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves.
>> We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general
>> policy recommendations and legal actions.
>>
>> The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO,
>> USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous
>> national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different
>> and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a
>> principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by
>> another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As
>> member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but
>> in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It
>> supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights
>> aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete
>> cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports
>> freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in
>> the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression.
>> UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce
>> drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.
>>
>> And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included
>> civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the
>> very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last
>> minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in
>> particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face
>> a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical
>> interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder
>> debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the
>> Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different
>> discussion cultures on the governmental level.
>>
>> What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more
>> systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
>>
>> 1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of
>> Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for
>> "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as
>> it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a
>> Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by
>> governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second
>> question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF?
>> a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?
>>
>> 2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The
>> question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing
>> governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define
>> what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve
>> existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such
>> a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the
>> membership, the budget, the oversight?
>>
>> 3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like
>> social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT,
>> intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security,
>> crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of
>> the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific
>> problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political
>> recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should
>> do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue
>> before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a
>> case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different
>> issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed
>> system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those
>> policies.
>>
>> 4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
>> There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the
>> traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen
>> transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have
>> ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue
>> probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a
>> mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the
>> first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so
>> impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new
>> territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a
>> multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the
>> UN?
>>
>> Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group
>> but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward
>> to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the
>> Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/ad2008ad/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 06:33:07 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 22:33:07 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiBNcuxGk8_4wP=OdDufzLgOa6jYX_6Lm_np48kB1f4t6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CAJwbTiARf-+UXbRcik75hGYNnHCoLWM9oPw2RVbx4WofuGyGaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJwbTiBNcuxGk8_4wP=OdDufzLgOa6jYX_6Lm_np48kB1f4t6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAKVjATN6wRGeV_pMUUUT=YWq7uybvuKotyFGpP7roSZA@mail.gmail.com>

The ITU has an existing Dedicated Group on International Internet - related
public policy issues, see:

http://www.itu.int/council/groups/wsis/dedicatedgroup.html

The materials are closed of course to *members* only.

On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Also as I write this the ITU Council meeting, some members are tweeting
> that
>
>
> drafting group to meet later today to discuss ToR for the dedicated group
> on international internet-related public policy issues
>
> Bulgaria: Along with USA, offers to participate in drafting group to
> finalise terms of reference for WG on Net Public Policy
>
> USA: Asks if it would be useful if ITU Sector Members be invited to join
> the WG on Net Public Policy
>
> Mali: Supports Canada's proposal that all stakeholders be involved in open
> consultations for WG on Net Public Policy
>
> Brazil: open consultations for Working Group on Net Public Policy a great
> way to engage with all stakeholders
>
> ITU Council discussing proposal by Saudi Arabia to turn Internet Dedicated
> Group into Working Group as mandated by
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is excellent. Marilia, ignore my comment on the KCS. Following
>> Professor Wolfgang's email, I would like to submit my perspective on the
>> matter. I agree that we should ask concrete questions before making policy
>> recommendation. I think also that people should dialogue on what those
>> questions should be. I agree that a more holistic approach is needed. My
>> illustrations are not visible in text so I am attaching my comments in a
>> document.
>>
>> Whilst I may not agree with everything in it, I still think that  the IBSA
>> should be commended for stimulating the dialogue and discussions. My views
>> are attached.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Sala
>>
>>
>> 2011/10/13 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
>> wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>
>>> Hi everybody
>>>
>>> it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic
>>> discussion about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to
>>> keep the Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights
>>> oriented and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that
>>> governments have equal rights in determining Internet related public policy
>>> issues on a global level.
>>>
>>> 2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions
>>> which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda,
>>> which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A
>>> number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A
>>> number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still
>>> open.
>>>
>>> From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic
>>> approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in
>>> this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with
>>> governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves.
>>> We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general
>>> policy recommendations and legal actions.
>>>
>>> The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO,
>>> USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous
>>> national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different
>>> and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a
>>> principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by
>>> another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As
>>> member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but
>>> in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It
>>> supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights
>>> aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete
>>> cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports
>>> freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in
>>> the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression.
>>> UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce
>>> drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.
>>>
>>> And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included
>>> civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the
>>> very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last
>>> minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in
>>> particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face
>>> a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical
>>> interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder
>>> debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the
>>> Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different
>>> discussion cultures on the governmental level.
>>>
>>> What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more
>>> systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
>>>
>>> 1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of
>>> Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for
>>> "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as
>>> it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a
>>> Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by
>>> governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second
>>> question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF?
>>> a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?
>>>
>>> 2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The
>>> question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing
>>> governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define
>>> what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve
>>> existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such
>>> a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the
>>> membership, the budget, the oversight?
>>>
>>> 3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like
>>> social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT,
>>> intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security,
>>> crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of
>>> the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific
>>> problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political
>>> recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should
>>> do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue
>>> before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a
>>> case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different
>>> issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed
>>> system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those
>>> policies.
>>>
>>> 4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
>>> There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the
>>> traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen
>>> transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have
>>> ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue
>>> probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a
>>> mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the
>>> first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so
>>> impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new
>>> territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a
>>> multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the
>>> UN?
>>>
>>> Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group
>>> but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward
>>> to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the
>>> Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
>>>
>>> Wolfgang
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/55c793c9/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, 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


From miguel.alcaine at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 13:43:31 2011
From: miguel.alcaine at gmail.com (Miguel Alcaine)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:43:31 -0600
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <CAMnrbsSCyqJucNzo5uVgHy1sND+uptkiZVxw0bznnWisrUf6Dg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Wolfgang:

Very good ideas.

In respect to ITU, the oversight is defined in its foundational documents.
The Plenipotenciary (PP) is the highest organ of decision, where many
different elections are conducted, including those of the 5 elected
officers. Between PPs, the Council is charged with overseeing the direction
of the ITU. Additionally, the 3 sectors have global meetings every 4 years
and have an advisory organ between them to help the respective elected
officer. Among them, PP and WRC (radio) are treaty based.

All the governance machinery is governmental based. Take into account ITU
has been around since 1865.

ITU has spaces of participation for the private sector in daily business and
recently ITU has opened a new membership type for academia. Although some
NGOs collaborate with ITU work, we need to learn how to work together
better.

Best,

Miguel

Disclaimer
My ideas are those of my own and does not represent any position of my
employer or any other institution

2011/10/12 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

> Hi everybody
>
> it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic discussion
> about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to keep the
> Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights oriented
> and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that governments have
> equal rights in determining Internet related public policy issues on a
> global level.
>
> 2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions
> which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda,
> which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A
> number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A
> number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still
> open.
>
> From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic
> approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in
> this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with
> governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves.
> We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general
> policy recommendations and legal actions.
>
> The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO,
> USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous
> national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different
> and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a
> principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by
> another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As
> member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but
> in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It
> supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights
> aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete
> cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports
> freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in
> the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression.
> UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce
> drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.
>
> And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included
> civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the
> very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last
> minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in
> particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face
> a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical
> interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder
> debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the
> Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different
> discussion cultures on the governmental level.
>
> What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more
> systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
>
> 1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of
> Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for
> "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as
> it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a
> Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by
> governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second
> question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF?
> a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?
>
> 2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The
> question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing
> governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define
> what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve
> existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such
> a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the
> membership, the budget, the oversight?
>
> 3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like
> social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT,
> intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security,
> crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of
> the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific
> problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political
> recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should
> do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue
> before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a
> case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different
> issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed
> system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those
> policies.
>
> 4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
> There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the
> traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen
> transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have
> ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue
> probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a
> mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the
> first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so
> impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new
> territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a
> multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the
> UN?
>
> Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group
> but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward
> to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the
> Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111013/7aef933d/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, 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


From avri at acm.org  Thu Oct 13 14:12:41 2011
From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria)
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:12:41 -0400
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <CAMnrbsSCyqJucNzo5uVgHy1sND+uptkiZVxw0bznnWisrUf6Dg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com> <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com> <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net> <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com> <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <CAMnrbsSCyqJucNzo5uVgHy1sND+uptkiZVxw0bznnWisrUf6Dg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71093D14-1131-4B21-857E-BAAF51CBC9DD@acm.org>

Hi Miguel,

I would think that until such time as the ITU opens itself up to civil society there is very little to be done other than to resist its initiatives at every turn.  How can civil society possibly support an organization that ignores our existence.

avri

On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:43, Miguel Alcaine wrote:

> Dear Wolfgang:
> 
> Very good ideas.
> 
> In respect to ITU, the oversight is defined in its foundational documents. The Plenipotenciary (PP) is the highest organ of decision, where many different elections are conducted, including those of the 5 elected officers. Between PPs, the Council is charged with overseeing the direction of the ITU. Additionally, the 3 sectors have global meetings every 4 years and have an advisory organ between them to help the respective elected officer. Among them, PP and WRC (radio) are treaty based.
> 
> All the governance machinery is governmental based. Take into account ITU has been around since 1865.
> 
> ITU has spaces of participation for the private sector in daily business and recently ITU has opened a new membership type for academia. Although some NGOs collaborate with ITU work, we need to learn how to work together better.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Miguel
> 
> Disclaimer
> My ideas are those of my own and does not represent any position of my employer or any other institution
> 
> 2011/10/12 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> Hi everybody
> 
> it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic discussion about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to keep the Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights oriented and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that governments have equal rights in determining Internet related public policy issues on a global level.
> 
> 2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda, which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still open.
> 
> >From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves. We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general policy recommendations and legal actions.
> 
> The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO, USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression. UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.
> 
> And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different discussion cultures on the governmental level.
> 
> What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
> 
> 1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF? a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?
> 
> 2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the membership, the budget, the oversight?
> 
> 3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT, intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security, crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those policies.
> 
> 4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism. There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the UN?
> 
> Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
> 
> Wolfgang
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 13 19:18:54 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:18:54 +1200
Subject: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <71093D14-1131-4B21-857E-BAAF51CBC9DD@acm.org>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492>
	<CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org>
	<77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
	<55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
	<CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca>
	<CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca>
	<2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
	<CAMnrbsSCyqJucNzo5uVgHy1sND+uptkiZVxw0bznnWisrUf6Dg@mail.gmail.com>
	<71093D14-1131-4B21-857E-BAAF51CBC9DD@acm.org>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDbd7FP_TX6MzF0pJu97Ou=m0=Bxv+6oZppPwv250J7Aw@mail.gmail.com>

The Private Sector of which the International Chamber of Commerce would fall
under also has reservations with the ITU seeking to broaden its role as far
as internet governance is concerned.

See:
http://www.iccwbo.org/home/statements_rules/statements/2005/373_462_ITU.pdf

I am not critiquing ITU merely saying that with global internet governance
to relegate global policy formulation to one single institution is not a
healthy governance model.

On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:

> Hi Miguel,
>
> I would think that until such time as the ITU opens itself up to civil
> society there is very little to be done other than to resist its initiatives
> at every turn.  How can civil society possibly support an organization that
> ignores our existence.
>
> avri
>
> On 13 Oct 2011, at 13:43, Miguel Alcaine wrote:
>
> > Dear Wolfgang:
> >
> > Very good ideas.
> >
> > In respect to ITU, the oversight is defined in its foundational
> documents. The Plenipotenciary (PP) is the highest organ of decision, where
> many different elections are conducted, including those of the 5 elected
> officers. Between PPs, the Council is charged with overseeing the direction
> of the ITU. Additionally, the 3 sectors have global meetings every 4 years
> and have an advisory organ between them to help the respective elected
> officer. Among them, PP and WRC (radio) are treaty based.
> >
> > All the governance machinery is governmental based. Take into account ITU
> has been around since 1865.
> >
> > ITU has spaces of participation for the private sector in daily business
> and recently ITU has opened a new membership type for academia. Although
> some NGOs collaborate with ITU work, we need to learn how to work together
> better.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Miguel
> >
> > Disclaimer
> > My ideas are those of my own and does not represent any position of my
> employer or any other institution
> >
> > 2011/10/12 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <
> wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
> > Hi everybody
> >
> > it seems to me that the time has come again to have a very basic
> discussion about what have to be done by whom and where shuld it be done to
> keep the Internet open, free, stable, accessible for everybody, human rights
> oriented and to guarantee - as outlined in the Tunis Agenda - that
> governments have equal rights in determining Internet related public policy
> issues on a global level.
> >
> > 2011 has seen numerous approaches and initiativeas to answer questions
> which have raised in the six years since the adoption of the Tunis Agenda,
> which included IGF and EC as two interelated but distinct processes. A
> number of the proposals are new, others are old wine in net bottles. A
> number of issues from 2005 have been settled now. Other issues are still
> open.
> >
> > >From a CS point of view I think time is ripe now to take a more holistic
> approach, to define more in detail what the "respective role" of CS is in
> this global power struggle, what WE want to achieve in the discussions with
> governments and the private sector and how we shuld re-organize ourselves.
> We should first ask some very concrete questions before we propose general
> policy recommendations and legal actions.
> >
> > The various proposals on the table now (IBSA, COE, G8, OECD, OSCE, NATO,
> USA, EU, Shanghai-Group plus APC, Brazil, DC IRP plus ACTA and numerous
> national laws etc.) have something in common but are also rather different
> and contradict each other. Sometimes one government in one IGO supports a
> principle which is in contrast to another principle in a document adopted by
> another IGO where the same government is a member state. Look at Russia: As
> member of the G 8 it supports the principle of multistakeholder policy, but
> in the joint proposal with the Shanghai Group, it ignores it. Or Germany: It
> supports the more economic approach in the OECD and the more human rights
> aproach in the Council of Europe (which can lead to conflicts in concrete
> cases where you have to balance conflicting interests). The US supports
> freedom of expression but is critical with regard to Wikileaks, which is in
> the eyes of a lot of stakeholders a good example for freedom of expression.
> UK supports in the G8 a free Internet, but works at home to introduce
> drastic limitations, as France does it with HADOPI.
> >
> > And there are differences in approaches. Council of Europe has included
> civil society in drafting its declaration and was lstening to it until the
> very end. OECD included also civil society but ignored the voice in the last
> minute. Both OECD and COE were open for discussion in Nairobi. ISBA (in
> particular the Brazilian and Indian government) were also not afraid to face
> a multistakeholder discussion in Nairobi and they accepted critical
> interventions. But Russia and China rejected any form of multistakeholder
> debate on their proposal in Nairob. They just announced their plan of the
> Code of Conduct and did not answer any question. So we have also different
> discussion cultures on the governmental level.
> >
> > What I propose for our discussiomn is to seperate the issues for a more
> systematic structured discussion. I see three big issues:
> >
> > 1. the need to work towards a general (and global) "Framework of
> Commitments" (FoC) in form of a set of general principles as guidelines for
> "good behaviour" in the Internet (the so-called "constitutional moment", as
> it was discussed in Nairobi). Here one question is whether such a
> Declaration, code of conduct, compact or FoC should be elaborated by
> governments only or should it be a multistakeholder task. And the second
> question is who shoud do this: one of the existing bodies? the UN? the IGF?
> a new multistakeholder body (like the WGIG)?
> >
> > 2. the need to identify gaps in the existing institutional framework. The
> question here is which issues can NOT be settled within the existing
> governmental and non-governmental organisations. In case we can clear define
> what the missing link is what would be the right answer: tzo improve
> existing organisaitons by a reform process? To create a new body? What such
> a new body would do better and why? What would be the concrete mandate, the
> membership, the budget, the oversight?
> >
> > 3. the need to specify global public policies on specific issues like
> social networks, search engines, cloud computing, CIR management, IOT,
> intermediaries etc. with regard to privacy, freedom of expression, security,
> crime prevention, IPR etc. Here we have to identify the specific nature of
> the problem and to look for a concrete answer how to deal with this specific
> problem, whether a best practice guideline, a general political
> recommendation or a legally binding norm is necassary. And again: who should
> do this? We have to be very carefully that we first identify the issue
> before we start to develop policies and move to instruments. Here we need a
> case by case approach. There will be different solutions for different
> issues and at the end there will be a very diversified and distributed
> system of policies and mechanisms to implement (and to oversee/review) those
> policies.
> >
> > 4. the need to develop further a multistakeholder oversight mechanism.
> There new AoC review mechanism is conceptually a good starter to rethink the
> traditional approach to oversight. We need oversight to strengthen
> transparency, legitimacy and accountability, but there is no need to have
> ONE oversight body for all Internet related public policy issues. Each issue
> probably needs a specifically designed oversight mechanism. And such a
> mechanism has to be designed on a multistakeholder basis. Unfortunately the
> first review under the AoC (ATRT) was done in a hurry and was not so
> impressive. But the proposed design is an interesting step into a new
> territory how oversight can be organized issue based, decentralized and on a
> multistakeholder basis. And BTW, who oversees bodies like ITU, WIPO and the
> UN?
> >
> > Part of this issue will be discussed in the IGF Imrpovment working group
> but CS and the Caucus should trs to find its own mechanisms to move foreward
> to make proposals to the various bodies. The letter to the UNGA (the
> Shanghai project) was a good starter. More has to be done.
> >
> > Wolfgang
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> >
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111014/b7682da8/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, 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


From kabani at isd-rc.org  Fri Oct 14 01:55:56 2011
From: kabani at isd-rc.org (Asif Kabani)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:55:56 +0500
Subject: AW: [governance] Formal IGC response to IBSA proposal ahead of
 18-19 Summit?
In-Reply-To: <4E968929.9030200@ciroap.org>
References: <CACpVkK0O7BjAJ5QEgnx7ticsHZHYjW8h1HaK0ZCOBuaLa7tPSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F3BFA8DBDEE49F5A6D79B13F3FC1158@acer6e40e97492> <CAC0JwGM6=X8VZgRxGeq94KFVmX_b2aue7gUY3d49i+DHwoW4QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1AFC79A4-0A09-410E-ADB3-957404F661B0@ciroap.org> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B02F31A@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu>
 <55ec4c25297e0eb510ee91249094c476.squirrel@www.itforchange.net>
 <CACAaNxji0mo5Smcdy7QbAoyw=eYx27egCrvjr=W=OBdVBYZo1Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E9438C0.3020505@cafonso.ca> <CACAaNxhUQL0qv_=COsL956y+O4YUTCswH+EZQcS-AfH+y8Y9UQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4E959A17.4080103@cafonso.ca> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C601@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
 <CALLeeatiOsU66d81TiJ1TB1WinoSmd-0LSfOdgKZoU5yHfaTvQ@mail.gmail.com> <4E968929.9030200@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAOzvoR0Wg+ysEMVVjnqB6cCNvmLySHvT5aLvDXQ8OPmHbk1XFg@mail.gmail.com>

Jeremy,

thank you for sharing the statement,

regards

On 13 October 2011 11:46, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> **
> On 13/10/11 13:16, Sonigitu Ekpe wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Excellent analysis from Wolfgang and others!
>
> Hope we can assemble very good statement from the inputs so far?
>
> Dr. Jeremy looking up for a daft statement.
>
>
> I have already re-sent our last statement on enhanced cooperation to Romulo
> Neves of Brazil who promised to share it with his colleagues from South
> Africa and India ahead of the meeting.  But I felt that there was not strong
> support for a new statement yet, such as the one that Sala had suggested we
> write after holding a straw poll (or in her words "white monkey" poll, which
> is a new expression for me!).  Given the upcoming change in coordinators,
> this is another reason why it may now be best to wait until after the IBSA
> meeting before issuing a new statement.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>



-- 
Asif Kabani
Email: kabani.asif at gmail.com


“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111014/ec91cc53/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Fri Oct 14 06:36:52 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 22:36:52 +1200
Subject: [governance] Interesting Developments in Europe
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDqmwPDW0gH-WK0=05eA345BwN68fbKz3SK9sa2p2DwrQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

1) Commission has approved the acquisition of skype by Microsoft:
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/1164&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

2)The Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) have
released a report on Next Generation Access:
http://erg.ec.europa.eu/doc/berec/bor_11_43.pdf
(I found the treatment of local loop unbundling interesting and the
different jurisdictions within Europe)


3)BEREC  has published for consultation draft guidelines on net neutrality
and transparency, see: http://erg.eu.int/doc/berec/bor_11_44.pdf

This is interesting considering their response to the European Commission's
consultation on the open Internet and Net Neutrality in Europe in 2010,
see: http://erg.eu.int/doc/berec/bor_10_42.pdf


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111014/f121220d/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, 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


From vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk  Fri Oct 14 07:04:51 2011
From: vinsolo15 at yahoo.co.uk (vincent solomon)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:04:51 +0100 (BST)
Subject: [governance] Re: Fwd: I am my own boss...
Message-ID: <1318590291.41539.androidMobile@web29014.mail.ird.yahoo.com>

<p>Hi<br>this will truly help you discover who you literally are<br><a href="http://piekne-mazury.cba.pl/NicholasYoung25.html">http://piekne-mazury.cba.pl/NicholasYoung25.html</a><br>see you</p>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111014/ce49e7d4/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, 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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Fri Oct 14 11:41:57 2011
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:41:57 -0400
Subject: [governance] IMPORTANT: Work Continues to Increase Developing
 Economies' Participation in the New gTLD Program
Message-ID: <CAC0JwGO8cTdooyJT49RL+tTb=NkP=UfAsTPU6J15p=tBucbrwA@mail.gmail.com>

(Apologies for cross-posting)

From: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13oct11-en.htm

  Work Continues to Increase Developing Economies Participation in the New
gTLD Program Comment Period Deadlines (*) Important Information Links Public
Comment Box<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/jas-final-report-13oct11-en.htm>
*Open Date:* 13 October 2011 To Submit Your Comments
(Forum)<jas-final-report at icann.org>
*Close Date:* 16 December 2011 *Time (UTC):* 23:59 View Comments
Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/jas-final-report/>
*Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose*

A message from the JAS WG:

Public comment is requested concerning the Joint Applicant Support *Final
Report* <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-en.pdf> [PDF,
503 KB] which deals with a very important issue: *How can ICANN assist
applicants from developing economies increase their participation in the new
generic Top-Level Domain (New gTLD) Program? *Comments will be received
until December 16 2011.

The Final Report is the last step of the work done by the Joint Applicant
Support Working Group (JAS WG). The group is represented by ICANN community
members from around the world that have been working together on this
initiative since April 2010. The Report offers recommendations on how ICANN
should develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants
from developing economies requiring assistance in applying for and operating
new gTLDs Registries under the New gTLD Program. The Report proposes initial
criteria for qualification as well as several other types of support for
ICANN to consider. It has been approved by ALAC and the GNSO, the chartering
organizations.

Translations of the Final
Report<http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-en.pdf>
[PDF,
503 KB]:

   - Español <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-es.pdf>
[PDF,
   513 KB]
   - Français <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-fr.pdf>
[PDF,
   570 KB]

*Section II: Background*

Below are some basic aspects of this work.

*This proposal is currently under consideration by ICANN community, Board
and Staff. A Program is under development and further details will be made
available on ICANN's website to the general public.*

The JAS WG was formed following a
Resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm>
from
ICANN Board of Directors in Nairobi, on March 2010 that asked ICANN's
stakeholder community *"...to develop a sustainable approach to providing
support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new
gTLDs."*

   1. What is this all about? What is a Final Report?

   The Final Report is a document produced by the JAS WG that offers
   recommendations on how ICANN should develop a sustainable approach to
   providing support to applicants from developing economies requiring
   assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs Registries. The Final
   Report proposes initial criteria for qualification as well as several other
   types of support for ICANN to consider. It has been approved by the GNSO and
   ALAC, the chartering organizations.

   This initiative is related to the New gTLD Program, which in the near
   future will allow entities from around the world to apply for a new generic
   top-level domain (new gTLD). The applicants passing the evaluation process
   will sign a contract with ICANN and run a Registry.
   2. Who is being considered to receive support?

   Once the new gTLD applicant interested in receiving support has
   demonstrated "service to the public interest," "financial capabilities and
   need," one or more of the following characteristics apply:
   - Support by and/or for distinct cultural, linguistic and ethnic
      communities;
      - Service in an under-served language, the presence of which on the
      Internet has been limited;
      - Operation in a developing economy in a manner that provides genuine
      local social benefit;
      - Advocated by non-profit, civil society and non-governmental
      organizations in a manner consistent with the organizations'
social service
      mission(s); and
      - Operation by a local entrepreneur(s), providing demonstrable social
      benefit in those geographic areas where market constraints make normal
      business operations more difficult.

   The Final Report also recommends that it instead use the internationally
   agreed-upon UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs list:
   - Least Developed Countries: category 199;
      - Landlocked Developing Countries: category 432;
      - Small Island Developing States: category 722;
      - Indigenous Peoples, as described in Article 1 of Convention No. 169
      of the International Labour Organization and the UN Declaration on the
      Rights of Indigenous Peoples.All applicants will be expected give a
      self-declaration that they are eligible to receive support under these
      criteria.
   3. Who does NOT qualify for support?

   According to the JAS WG, the application must NOT have any of the
   following characteristics:
   - An applicant for a gTLD string that is not a generic word intended to
      reference a specific commercial entity (commonly referred to
within ICANN as
      a "dot-brand");
      - A governmental or para-statal institution;
      - A gTLD string that is a geographic name or is based on one;
      - Affiliated with sponsors or partners that are bankrupt or under
      bankruptcy protection;
      - Affiliated with sponsors or partners that are the subject of
      litigation or criminal investigation;
      - Incapable of meeting any of the Applicant Guidebook's due diligence
      procedures.
   4. Who benefits from this? Why is it important?

   We all benefit from this initiative. The Internet belongs to all as well
   as the responsibility to look into effective ways to reduce the Digital
   Divide, in this particular case, by delivering a sustainable and critical
   support for applicants from developing economies and looking for a solution
   not only at the application phase but also through to the initial years of
   these new Registry operators.

   It is important because the Internet is a virtual real estate that
   belongs to everyone. Entities from around the world should be able to
   increase their participation in the top-level expansion. The Working Group
   also stresses it is important not only to increase participation from
   developing economies, but also to increase the likelihood of success by
   these new participants that will be delivering Domain Name Services (DNS).

   The current New gTLD Program, as designed, has an evaluation (and several
   other fees) that are considered high for a significant number of potential
   participants from around the world. Besides the issue of high fees, the
   program is in English only and has an evaluation process with criteria and
   requirements that are quite complex to navigate.
   5. What kind of assistance in being considered?

    The Final Report proposes a full array of financial and non-financial
   support to be offered  to applicants that meet the established criteria.

   The support should be available in the first and all subsequent rounds of
   new gTLD applications.

   Currently ICANN has launched an online work space dedicated to connect
   potential applicants from developing regions who wish to apply for a New
   gTLD in their community with organizations who wish to offer either
   financial or non-financial assistance. See details on how this space works
   here:http://newgtlds.icann.org/applicants/candidate-support
   6. Who is part of this Working Group?

   The JAS WG is comprised of highly respected and experienced volunteers
   from the Supporting Organization and the Advisory Committee. This
   all-volunteer group teleconferences twice each week, and works through a
   Wiki and mailing lists. These active contributors are located in Australia,
   Africa, Asia, Europe, South America, North America and the Caribbean.

*Section III: Document and Resource Links*

Relevant Resolutions and previous Public Comment Forum:

   - Information about the New gTLD
Program<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm>
   - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#20
   - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.2
   - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-28oct10-en.htm
   - http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201004
   - First Milestone Report Public
Forum<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201012-en.htm#jas-milestone-report>
   -
   http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/second-milestone-report-10jun11-en.htm

Archive regarding the WG activities:

   - E-mail: soac-newgtldapsup-wg at icann.org
   - Wiki:
   https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/SO-AC+New+gTLD+Applicant+Support+Working+Group+%28JAS-WG%29

*Section IV: Additional Information*

The JAS WG will hold a session during the upcoming ICANN Dakar
Meeting<http://dakar42.icann.org/full-schedule> to
both explain the Final Report and receive additional community feedback.
This session will have remote participation for the people not able to
attend in person.

The JAS WG recently held a webinar about the Final Report. The webinar has
been recorded and is available in English, French and Spanish. See
recordings here <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#sep>.
 *Staff Contact:* Karla Valente *Email:*
karla.valente at icann.org<karla.valente at icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Work%20Continues%20to%20Increase%20Developing%20Economies%20Participation%20in%20the%20New%20gTLD%20Program%20public%20comment%20period>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111014/663792f5/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Fri Oct 14 14:03:08 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [governance] IMPORTANT: Work Continues to Increase Developing
 Economies' Participation in the New gTLD Program
Message-ID: <1318615388.54134.yint-ygo-j2me@web161010.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Dear All,
Thanks to Tracy for highlighting the importance to the program for Developing Economies.

Would you like to share your own review comments?

1. How much applicants are expected to avail the support actually?
e.g. 5, 10, 50 or 100s? As per the budget/funds are being reserved/arranged.

2. Expected success/ outcome of IDN gTLDs of Developing / under-Developed Economies 

3. Expected cost per domain (cost transferred to the end user)?
 
Thanks.

Imran Ahmed Shah

>On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 20:41 PKT Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google wrote:>(Apologies for cross-posting)>>From: http://www.icann.org/en/announcements/announcement-13oct11-en.htm>>  Work Continues to Increase Developing Economies Participation in the New>gTLD Program Comment Period Deadlines (*) Important Information Links Public>Comment Box<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/jas-final-report-13oct11-en.htm>>*Open Date:* 13 October 2011 To Submit Your Comments>(Forum)<jas-final-report at icann.org>>*Close Date:* 16 December 2011 *Time (UTC):* 23:59 View Comments>Submitted<http://forum.icann.org/lists/jas-final-report/>>*Section I: Description, Explanation, and Purpose*>>A message from the JAS WG:>>Public comment is requested concerning the Joint Applicant Support *Final>Report* <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-en.pdf> [PDF,>503 KB] which deals with a very important issue: *How can ICANN assist>applicants from developing economies increase
 their participation in the new>generic Top-Level Domain (New gTLD) Program? *Comments will be received>until December 16 2011.>>The Final Report is the last step of the work done by the Joint Applicant>Support Working Group (JAS WG). The group is represented by ICANN community>members from around the world that have been working together on this>initiative since April 2010. The Report offers recommendations on how ICANN>should develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants>from developing economies requiring assistance in applying for and operating>new gTLDs Registries under the New gTLD Program. The Report proposes initial>criteria for qualification as well as several other types of support for>ICANN to consider. It has been approved by ALAC and the GNSO, the chartering>organizations.>>Translations of the Final>Report<http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-en.pdf>>[PDF,>503 KB]:>>   - Español
 <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-es.pdf>>[PDF,>   513 KB]>   - Français <http://gnso.icann.org/drafts/jas-final-report-13sep11-fr.pdf>>[PDF,>   570 KB]>>*Section II: Background*>>Below are some basic aspects of this work.>>*This proposal is currently under consideration by ICANN community, Board>and Staff. A Program is under development and further details will be made>available on ICANN's website to the general public.*>>The JAS WG was formed following a>Resolution<http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm>>from>ICANN Board of Directors in Nairobi, on March 2010 that asked ICANN's>stakeholder community *"...to develop a sustainable approach to providing>support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new>gTLDs."*>>   1. What is this all about? What is a Final Report?>>   The Final Report is a document produced by the JAS WG that offers>   recommendations on how ICANN should develop a
 sustainable approach to>   providing support to applicants from developing economies requiring>   assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs Registries. The Final>   Report proposes initial criteria for qualification as well as several other>   types of support for ICANN to consider. It has been approved by the GNSO and>   ALAC, the chartering organizations.>>   This initiative is related to the New gTLD Program, which in the near>   future will allow entities from around the world to apply for a new generic>   top-level domain (new gTLD). The applicants passing the evaluation process>   will sign a contract with ICANN and run a Registry.>   2. Who is being considered to receive support?>>   Once the new gTLD applicant interested in receiving support has>   demonstrated "service to the public interest," "financial capabilities and>   need," one or more of the following characteristics apply:>   - Support by and/or for distinct cultural,
 linguistic and ethnic>      communities;>      - Service in an under-served language, the presence of which on the>      Internet has been limited;>      - Operation in a developing economy in a manner that provides genuine>      local social benefit;>      - Advocated by non-profit, civil society and non-governmental>      organizations in a manner consistent with the organizations'>social service>      mission(s); and>      - Operation by a local entrepreneur(s), providing demonstrable social>      benefit in those geographic areas where market constraints make normal>      business operations more difficult.>>   The Final Report also recommends that it instead use the internationally>   agreed-upon UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs list:>   - Least Developed Countries: category 199;>      - Landlocked Developing Countries: category 432;>      - Small Island Developing States: category 722;>      - Indigenous Peoples, as described in
 Article 1 of Convention No. 169>      of the International Labour Organization and the UN Declaration on the>      Rights of Indigenous Peoples.All applicants will be expected give a>      self-declaration that they are eligible to receive support under these>      criteria.>   3. Who does NOT qualify for support?>>   According to the JAS WG, the application must NOT have any of the>   following characteristics:>   - An applicant for a gTLD string that is not a generic word intended to>      reference a specific commercial entity (commonly referred to>within ICANN as>      a "dot-brand");>      - A governmental or para-statal institution;>      - A gTLD string that is a geographic name or is based on one;>      - Affiliated with sponsors or partners that are bankrupt or under>      bankruptcy protection;>      - Affiliated with sponsors or partners that are the subject of>      litigation or criminal investigation;>      - Incapable of meeting any of
 the Applicant Guidebook's due diligence>      procedures.>   4. Who benefits from this? Why is it important?>>   We all benefit from this initiative. The Internet belongs to all as well>   as the responsibility to look into effective ways to reduce the Digital>   Divide, in this particular case, by delivering a sustainable and critical>   support for applicants from developing economies and looking for a solution>   not only at the application phase but also through to the initial years of>   these new Registry operators.>>   It is important because the Internet is a virtual real estate that>   belongs to everyone. Entities from around the world should be able to>   increase their participation in the top-level expansion. The Working Group>   also stresses it is important not only to increase participation from>   developing economies, but also to increase the likelihood of success by>   these new participants that will be delivering Domain Name
 Services (DNS).>>   The current New gTLD Program, as designed, has an evaluation (and several>   other fees) that are considered high for a significant number of potential>   participants from around the world. Besides the issue of high fees, the>   program is in English only and has an evaluation process with criteria and>   requirements that are quite complex to navigate.>   5. What kind of assistance in being considered?>>    The Final Report proposes a full array of financial and non-financial>   support to be offered  to applicants that meet the established criteria.>>   The support should be available in the first and all subsequent rounds of>   new gTLD applications.>>   Currently ICANN has launched an online work space dedicated to connect>   potential applicants from developing regions who wish to apply for a New>   gTLD in their community with organizations who wish to offer either>   financial or non-financial assistance. See details on how
 this space works>   here:http://newgtlds.icann.org/applicants/candidate-support>   6. Who is part of this Working Group?>>   The JAS WG is comprised of highly respected and experienced volunteers>   from the Supporting Organization and the Advisory Committee. This>   all-volunteer group teleconferences twice each week, and works through a>   Wiki and mailing lists. These active contributors are located in Australia,>   Africa, Asia, Europe, South America, North America and the Caribbean.>>*Section III: Document and Resource Links*>>Relevant Resolutions and previous Public Comment Forum:>>   - Information about the New gTLD>Program<http://www.icann.org/en/topics/new-gtld-program.htm>>   - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-12mar10-en.htm#20>   - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-25sep10-en.htm#2.2>   - http://www.icann.org/en/minutes/resolutions-28oct10-en.htm>   - http://gnso.icann.org/resolutions/#201004>   - First Milestone Report
 Public>Forum<http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/public-comment-201012-en.htm#jas-milestone-report>>   ->   http://www.icann.org/en/public-comment/second-milestone-report-10jun11-en.htm>>Archive regarding the WG activities:>>   - E-mail: soac-newgtldapsup-wg at icann.org>   - Wiki:>   https://community.icann.org/display/jaswg/SO-AC+New+gTLD+Applicant+Support+Working+Group+%28JAS-WG%29>>*Section IV: Additional Information*>>The JAS WG will hold a session during the upcoming ICANN Dakar>Meeting<http://dakar42.icann.org/full-schedule> to>both explain the Final Report and receive additional community feedback.>This session will have remote participation for the people not able to>attend in person.>>The JAS WG recently held a webinar about the Final Report. The webinar has>been recorded and is available in English, French and Spanish. See>recordings here <http://gnso.icann.org/calendar/#sep>.> *Staff Contact:* Karla Valente
 *Email:*>karla.valente at icann.org<karla.valente at icann.org?subject=More%20information%20on%20the%20Work%20Continues%20to%20Increase%20Developing%20Economies%20Participation%20in%20the%20New%20gTLD%20Program%20public%20comment%20period>
____________________________________________________________
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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Sat Oct 15 04:24:48 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 10:24:48 +0200
Subject: [governance] WG: Russian Federation increases financial
 contribution to ITU
References: <3005.Sebgarsh.AS-106917.2011.10.14.68692.16.pressoffice@itu.int>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C60D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

FYI

________________________________

Von: ITU Press Office [mailto:pressoffice at itu.int]
Gesendet: Fr 14.10.2011 19:04
An: Mr Wolfgang Kleinwachter
Betreff: Russian Federation increases financial contribution to ITU



ORIGINAL: English

Russian Federation increases financial contribution to ITU -
Support to enhance the role of ITU in global ICT development

Geneva, 14 October 2011 - The Russian Federation announced a significant increase in its financial support to ITU, raising its 'contributory units' from ten to fifteen, amounting to CHF 4,777,000, or about USD 5.32 million at current exchange rates. Each 'contributory unit', which ITU Member States provide on a voluntary basis, is CHF 318,000.

This increase is in addition to the CHF 5 million contribution from the Russian Federation towards the refurbishment of ITU's main conference hall, now dedicated to Alexander Stepanovich Popov (1859-1906), the Russian physicist who first demonstrated the practical application of electromagnetic waves.


For full text see:
  http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2011/40.aspx

__________
Unsubscribe from mailing list:

http://www.itu.int/newsroom/press_releases/unsubscribe.asp?id=3005&lang=en



____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Sat Oct 15 06:08:44 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:08:44 +0200
Subject: [governance] WG: Russian Federation increases financial
 contribution to ITU
In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C60D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
References: <3005.Sebgarsh.AS-106917.2011.10.14.68692.16.pressoffice@itu.int> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C60D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
Message-ID: <398D820C-A75A-4DCA-8E42-AA8B0B22B59B@uzh.ch>

One has to assume this is a strategic decision that will be leveraged later, that's how it works.  I was sole CS person on the US delegation to the 1997 World Telecom Policy Forum where the big issues were the WTO's new basic telecom agreement and the pressures eroding the accounting and settlements system from which many PTTs were making billions via above-cost rates.  The head of the Japanese delegation got up and pledged a pot of money to help developing country PTTs make a soft landing transition, to great applause.  Soon thereafter he was elected Secretary General, and spent two terms campaigning for ITU control of the Internet. Putin recently met with SG Toure, and now there's this.  I don't know if any of their more visible participants are eyeing leadership posts for the next election cycle, but the Russians do have proposals on the table seeking to expand ITU regulatory authority viz. the Internet and related issues, and they undoubtedly would like a nice voting bloc behind them.  

Which raises again the question of whether there's any way a new UN body, e.g. as envisioned by the IBSA proposal, could be insulated from the sort of vote buying & trading dynamics that pervade other UN processes, what that could mean for the Internet, etc…?

Bill

On Oct 15, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

> FYI
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: ITU Press Office [mailto:pressoffice at itu.int]
> Gesendet: Fr 14.10.2011 19:04
> An: Mr Wolfgang Kleinwachter
> Betreff: Russian Federation increases financial contribution to ITU
> 
> 
> 
> ORIGINAL: English
> 
> Russian Federation increases financial contribution to ITU -
> Support to enhance the role of ITU in global ICT development
> 
> Geneva, 14 October 2011 - The Russian Federation announced a significant increase in its financial support to ITU, raising its 'contributory units' from ten to fifteen, amounting to CHF 4,777,000, or about USD 5.32 million at current exchange rates. Each 'contributory unit', which ITU Member States provide on a voluntary basis, is CHF 318,000.
> 
> This increase is in addition to the CHF 5 million contribution from the Russian Federation towards the refurbishment of ITU's main conference hall, now dedicated to Alexander Stepanovich Popov (1859-1906), the Russian physicist who first demonstrated the practical application of electromagnetic waves.
> 
> 
> For full text see:
>  http://www.itu.int/net/pressoffice/press_releases/2011/40.aspx
> 
> __________
> Unsubscribe from mailing list:
> 
> http://www.itu.int/newsroom/press_releases/unsubscribe.asp?id=3005&lang=en
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Tue Oct 18 16:45:08 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:45:08 +1200
Subject: [governance] ICANN 42 in Dakar
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

If there are people on this list who will be in Dakar for the ICANN 42 or
who reside in Senegal, it would be great to share a cup of tea with you. I
will be in Dakar on the 21st October, 2011.

Best Regards,

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111019/cb9a4534/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, 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


From pranesh at cis-india.org  Tue Oct 18 22:55:43 2011
From: pranesh at cis-india.org (Pranesh Prakash)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:25:43 +0530
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
Message-ID: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>

Here's the relevant bit from the Tshwane Declaration. 

# Internet Governance
52. The Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to working together towards a people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and their agreement to continue to coordinate positions for the World Summit on Information Society (WSIS) follow-up mechanisms, as well as in the other fora and organizations related to the Information Society and Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). 
53. The Leaders expressed their satisfaction with the ongoing work in this arena; recognized the role of the Internet as a catalyst for economic and social progress; and emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a key global player. The leaders reaffirmed the IBSA framework agreement for Cooperation on the Information Society adopted on September 13, 2006 and recalled the commitments made in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and the Tunis Agenda with regard to Enhanced Cooperation. 
54. The Leaders highlighted the importance of building a wide political coalition at the international level for making the global internet governance regime as multilateral, democratic and transparent as provided by the WSIS.

In this context, they reiterated the urgent need to operationalise the process of ‘Enhanced Cooperation’ mandated by the Tunis Agenda and recalled, with satisfaction, the fruitful coordination amongst IBSA countries in the deliberations on ‘Enhanced Cooperation’ in the UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD) and in the UN Secretary-General’s Open Consultations held in December 2010. The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action. 
55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
-- 
Pranesh Prakash 
Programme Manager
Centre for Internet and Society
T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org 

Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
____________________________________________________________
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


From karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int  Wed Oct 19 00:55:28 2011
From: karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int (karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 06:55:28 +0200
Subject: [governance] ICANN 42 in Dakar
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1319000128.4e9e5840cf2e3@gold.itu.ch>

Dear Salanieta,
I'll also be there on 21st
Regards,

ATTOUMANI MOHAMED Karim,
Comoros representative on the Governmental Advisory Committee of ICANN
Ingénieur Télécoms en Transmission, Réseaux et Commutation
Chef du Département Études et Projets,
Autorité Nationale de Régulation des TIC (ANRTIC) - Union des Comores,
(+269) 334 37 06 (Mobile Moroni) - ID Skype: attoukarim

Quoting "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>:

> Dear All,
> 
> If there are people on this list who will be in Dakar for the ICANN 42 or
> who reside in Senegal, it would be great to share a cup of tea with you. I
> will be in Dakar on the 21st October, 2011.
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> -- 
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> 
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
> 



____________________________________________________________
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


From anriette at apc.org  Wed Oct 19 06:45:24 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 12:45:24 +0200
Subject: [governance] GENDER PERIPHERIES OF THE 2011 INTERNET GOVERNANCE
 FORUM
Message-ID: <4E9EAA44.7000308@apc.org>

Hi all

Here is APC's edition of GenderIT.org focused on the Nairobi IGF. We
would be really keen to get feedback. We are actually really excited
about this IGF. The women's rights activists who came really 'gets' why
internet governance is important and why they should become more
involved. Having a pre-IGF workshop on women's rights and internet
governance made a huge difference.

We have not finalised the results of the 'gender report card' we did on
this year's IGF but share some broad reflections in this edition of
GenderIT.org.

I have to commend Bill Drake on this score.. every workshop or main
session he moderates has majority female panels. The challenge however
is not so much in gender balance among speakers...

>From GenderIT.org on the results of the report card:

"Although....there is a relatively small gender gap between male and
female presenters, this did not translate into actual inclusion of
gendered perspectives and analysis in the content of the discussion or
presentations. This led us to assess that no direct link can be made
between numbers and gender inclusion, which is an important learning for
the organisers of IGF and IGF workshops.....

If there is serious commitment to uphold the multistakeholder principles
and to ensure diversity of concerns and knowledge, this means critical
inclusion of gendered analysis and perspectives. There is a need to go
beyond numbers and move from gender parity to inclusion. Some
recommendations to this end includes specific consideration of the
gendered dimension of thematic areas, and identifying speakers who can
enrich the dialogue on internet governance by bringing in a women's
rightsi and gendered analysis. "

Best

Anriette


--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
*GENDER CENTRED: A GenderIT.org thematic bulletin*
APC WNSP - GenderIT.org, 18 October 2011
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

I. THOUGHTS AROUND...Scoring participation
II. NEW ARTICLES
III. FEATURED RESOURCES
IV. FEMINIST TALKS

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Year after year the Internet Governance Forum renews expectations and
opportunities of gender advocates to find innovative solutions to
enhance women's rights online and offline. After 6 years of activism,
this space still seems to be resistant to the inclusion of gender
perspectives and activists arefaced with more questions than answers.
Where are women's rights on the internet governance agenda? How to get
the women's movements more involved within this new arena of public
policy? How to replace the protectionist approach that traditionally
surrounds women's rights defence with one that is rights-based? Along
with Jennifer Radloff who introduces this edition we believe it is a
responsibility of all stakeholders to make women's rights relevant and
visible in the IGF debates, and to do so gender analysis and women's
participation needs to be much more institusionalised in the planning of
the next IGF.

Looking forward to your comments, insights and submissions, Katerina and
Flavia from GenderIT.org!

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
I. THOUGHTS AROUND...
*Scoring participation – how does change happen for women in the IGF*
by Jennifer Radloff, a South African feminist activist and the APC
senior coordinator

During the years of my school and university studies, report cards
caused me high levels of anxiety but accompanied by some underlying
optimism. Report cards assumed all-knowing experts were making decisions
around my abilities and progress. It would invariably be a measure of
success or failure and would expose my weak points and (hopefully)
highlight my positive traits. But they always had a judgmental and
antagonistic picture in my mind.
My position has now shifted since seeing how report cards can gather
useful evidence and potentially affect change. The IGF Gender Report
Card initiative proposed by the APC was a first and small but revealing
step in measuring representation, visibility, content and contributions
from a gender perspective. The Gender Report Card looks at how many
women are participating in each IGF session, how many speakers of each
IGF session are men or women and to what extent each session does or
does not incorporate a gendered analysis...
Read the full editorial at:
http://www.genderit.org/node/3487

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
II. NEW ARTICLES

*Stripping the IGF bare: where are women´s rights?*
GenderIT.org's editors, Flavia Fascendini and Katerina Fialova, speak
with the APC WNSP members who took part at the Sixth Internet Governance
Forum that took place in Nairobi, Kenya from 27-30 September 2011. In
the interview, Chat García Ramilo, Dafne Sabanes Plou, Jac sm Kee, Jan
Moolman, and Jennifer Radloff from the APC Women´s Programme offer their
insights regarding gender balance and the presence of women's rights in
the 2011 IGF agenda.
http://www.genderit.org/node/3486

*Women activists and internet governance: let's open the debate*
Dafne Plou reports on the workshop of about 20 women's rights advocates
from different countries and backgrounds who met late September 2011, in
Nairobi, Kenya, just before the 6th Internet Governance Forum to share
their experiences in policy advocacy and to discuss internet governance
and its linkage to women’s rights agendas. The workshop was organised by
the APC Women's Networking Support Programme (APC WNSP).
http://www.genderit.org/node/3483

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
III. FEATURED RESOURCES

*6th UN IGF: Statement by the Gender Dynamic Coalition*
The Gender Dynamic Coalition statement issued during the 6th UN Internet
Governance Forum in September 2011, in Kenya, criticises the continued
gender imbalance in both participation (as speakers and participants of
workshops and sessions) and substance of the discussions at IGF. It also
supports the call to make human rights the IGF 2012 theme and requests
that equal attention be paid to women's rights, emphasising the need of
a rights-based approach instead of protectionist solutions.
http://www.genderit.org/node/3480

*Human rights online: new issues and threats*
This policy issue paper from the Association for Progressive
Communications (APC) outlines the state of human rights online and the
major challenges facing activists and human rights defenders. As levels
of censorship and surveillance are increasing worldwide, even in
democratic countries, which threatens the work -- and the lives -- of
human rights defenders, APC calls for the theme of the 2012 IGF to focus
exclusively on human rights.
http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/IRHRPolicyBrief_EN.pdf

*APC Priorities for the Sixth Internet Governance Forum*
The 13-page brief by APC reminds UN conference-goers of critical issues
facing the freedom of the internet today including affordability,
openness and network neutrality in the mobile internet and online
violence against women.
http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/APCIGFBrief2011.pdf

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
IV. FEATURED FEMINIST TALKS

*Why women's movements should take a deep breath…*
Aisha Lee Shaheed was one of the participants of the two-day workshop
“Women’s Rights and Internet Governance” convened by the APC WNSP late
September 2011, in Nairobi, Kenya, just prior to the 6th Annual Internet
Governance Forum. In her blog post, Aisha recounts how the workshop
shifted her perspective on internet governance and why she as a women
human rights defender should care about it.
http://www.genderit.org/node/3484

*IGF Gender Report Cards*
APC WNSP is sharing some preliminary results of the gender report cards
initiate. This was a pilot initiative put forward by the Association for
Progressive Communications to monitor and assess the level of gender
parity and inclusion at this year's Internet Governance Forum (IGF).
Although the numbers of sessions monitored were relatively small, and
that a deeper analysis is needed, the statistics generated and first
impressions can give us an idea of the role that women and gender issues
played in this IGF's debates.
http://www.genderit.org/node/3489

To read more Feminist Talk's posts and debates visit:
http://www.genderit.org/feminist-talk

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
*2011 APC Women's Networking Support Programme (APC WNSP). Except where
otherwise noted, content in this newsletter is published by
GenderIT.org, a project of the APC WNSP, and licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You
are free to share, republish or remix so long as you attribute
GenderIT.org and the author clearly as the original source.
*Gender Centred Archive*
http://www.genderit.org/bulletin
*Sign up for Gender Centred*
http://www.genderit.org/subscribe-bulletin
Write to: mailto:genderit at apcwomen.org
Twitter: @GenderITorg #genderit
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 07:04:57 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:04:57 +1200
Subject: [governance] ICANN 42 in Dakar
In-Reply-To: <CAPcSPKV1hf2mFOBJs5Kh0y6fBAEKcU7kcriBJ8s70teHF789Cg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPcSPKV1hf2mFOBJs5Kh0y6fBAEKcU7kcriBJ8s70teHF789Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBJJn=p41O5WV6TXHG4jQ_wuQVfThp3Yp6M2aKebe0AqA@mail.gmail.com>

[rofl] @ Olivier's comments. Yes it will be good to have a cup of tea
together, Karim, Baudouin & Olivier just to catch up :) We can even grab
some dinner on the 21st.

Yes travelling from the Pacific is such a strain but it should be worth it.

Best,
Sala

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Baudouin Schombe <
baudouin.schombe at gmail.com> wrote:

> I will reach Dakar on 21st
>
> Baudouin
>
> 2011/10/18 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> If there are people on this list who will be in Dakar for the ICANN 42 or
>> who reside in Senegal, it would be great to share a cup of tea with you. I
>> will be in Dakar on the 21st October, 2011.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> --
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>>
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
> CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
> ACADEMIE DES TIC
> FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
> At-Large Member
> NCSG Member
>
> email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
>          baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
> tél:+243998983491
> skype:b.schombe
> wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
> blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111019/31ac37ff/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, 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


From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 03:07:32 2011
From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 08:07:32 +0100
Subject: [governance] ICANN 42 in Dakar
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPcSPKV1hf2mFOBJs5Kh0y6fBAEKcU7kcriBJ8s70teHF789Cg@mail.gmail.com>

I will reach Dakar on 21st

Baudouin

2011/10/18 Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>

> Dear All,
>
> If there are people on this list who will be in Dakar for the ICANN 42 or
> who reside in Senegal, it would be great to share a cup of tea with you. I
> will be in Dakar on the 21st October, 2011.
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
ACADEMIE DES TIC
FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
At-Large Member
NCSG Member

email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
         baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
tél:+243998983491
skype:b.schombe
wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111019/501ee099/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Wed Oct 19 12:24:08 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:24:08 +0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch>



On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:

> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action. 

The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions to those recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum convened in Nairobi on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to pretend it didn't happen.

> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.

The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA rather than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder participation in the Observatory is not needed.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111019/b467b525/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, 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


From isolatedn at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 12:28:14 2011
From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 21:58:14 +0530
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CAHyAo0GyEHmjhxDzAn5+swc_wR6RMkbh_AAeNM-Ja80RVVQrMw@mail.gmail.com>

Hello Pranesh,


On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org>wrote:

> Here's the relevant bit from the Tshwane Declaration.
>
> # Internet Governance
> 52. The Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to working together towards a
> people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and
> their agreement to continue to coordinate positions for the World Summit on
> Information Society (WSIS) follow-up mechanisms, as well as in the other
> fora and organizations related to the Information Society and Information
> and Communication Technologies (ICTs).
>


# This summit is attended by the highest level of the Governments, from
India, the Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh has attended this summit. The
declaration that has emerged sounds positive and appears to be an
improvement over the previous draft that has been the cause for much
contention within the Internet Governance Community.

# However the wording of the declaration is "work together towards a people
centered, inclusive Information Society"  -  there is no explicit reference
to the 'multi-stakeholder model'.  Work towards a people centered society,
as Governments (alone) or together [with other stakeholders] on a
[mutli-stakeholder model]?  After all the debate in the mailing lists and at
the IGF that the Governments would certainly have taken note of, the wording
is still  elusive on commitment to the mutli-stakeholder model. Though the
wording includes 'inclusive', the reference is not explicit on the
mutli-stakeholder model.



> 53. The Leaders expressed their satisfaction with the ongoing work in this
> arena; recognized the role of the Internet as a catalyst for economic and
> social progress;


# Recognized the role of Internet, but no recognition of the progress made
in the area of Internet Governance process ?


> and emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a key global
> player.


# Yes, IBSA could emerge as a key player. As a person from India, I am
inspired by India's leadership in the Non-Aligned movement in the past, and
feel that India could work to bring together the unrepresented perspectives
on Internet Governance. This India could do from the IBSA base, beginning
with its present three member nations, in a non-confrontationistic manner
characteristic of India.

The leaders reaffirmed the IBSA framework agreement for Cooperation on the
> Information Society adopted on September 13, 2006 and recalled the
> commitments made in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and the Tunis
> Agenda with regard to Enhanced Cooperation.
>

# It is positive the declaration has drawn attention to "Enhanced
Cooperation".



> 54. The Leaders highlighted the importance of building a wide political
> coalition at the international level for making the global internet
> governance regime as multilateral, democratic and transparent as provided by
> the WSIS.
>

# Here it goes again.  "Global Internet Governance regime" as
"multillateral" as provided by WSIS ?   Is there a transcription error here?
 I hope that this is an unintended transcription error.

# If IBSA emerges as a "key global player" it would be great to see it
emerge as a "key global payer" with an unambiguous commitment to
multi-stakeholder participation.


> In this context, they reiterated the urgent need to operationalise the
> process of

‘Enhanced Cooperation’ mandated by the Tunis Agenda and recalled, with
> satisfaction, the fruitful coordination amongst IBSA countries in the
> deliberations on ‘Enhanced Cooperation’ in the UN Commission on Science and
> Technology for Development (CSTD) and in the UN Secretary-General’s Open
> Consultations held in December 2010. The leaders took note of the
> recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on Global Internet Governance convened
> in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake
> necessary follow-up action.
> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area that
> requires close collaboration and concrete action.


# "close collaboration" [ among the different stakeholders ] ?


> In this context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
> Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to monitor
> developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular updates and
> analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
>

#  I hope that the Governments take care to avoid bad advice if any.

Sivasubramanian M.
India.


> --
> Pranesh Prakash
> Programme Manager
> Centre for Internet and Society
> T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
>
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111019/58243a44/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, 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


From anriette at apc.org  Wed Oct 19 13:25:38 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 19:25:38 +0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org>

Hi Bill

I think your response is a bit hasty. There are serious gaps.. e.g. the
lack of emphasis on multi-stakeholder participation pointed out by
Sivasubramanian, but overall I think the section on IG shows very
clearly that the IBSA government representatives took reactions at the
IGF to their proposal very seriously.

This is a very different text to what had been proposed, and clearly
indicates that there will be further discussion on the September
meeting's recommendations, which is what civil society organisations
from the three countries requested.

Multi-stakeholder participation in the observatory is not mentioned, but
it is also not excluded. My assumption is that this was an oversight,
rather than a deliberate attempt to make it 'intergovernmental'.

However, I think that the absence of multi-stakeholder participation as
a principle is very disappointing. It should have been mentioned upfront
in the section on global governance reform. There are other references
to participation from stakeholders.. but that is not enough.

Human rights text is fairly good, as is the IP text.

Need to still read the whole document carefully.

Anriette



On 19/10/11 18:24, William Drake wrote:
> 
> 
> On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
> 
>> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on
>> Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September
>> 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action. 
> 
> The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions to those
> recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum convened in Nairobi
> on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to pretend it didn't happen.
> 
>> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area
>> that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this
>> context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
>> Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to
>> monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular
>> updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
> 
> The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA rather
> than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder participation in the
> Observatory is not needed.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Wed Oct 19 14:05:03 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 20:05:03 +0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org>
Message-ID: <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch>

Hi Anriette

We just had this conversation bilaterally, but sure let's open it up...

On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:25 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:

> Hi Bill
> 
> I think your response is a bit hasty. There are serious gaps.. e.g. the
> lack of emphasis on multi-stakeholder participation pointed out by
> Sivasubramanian, but overall I think the section on IG shows very
> clearly that the IBSA government representatives took reactions at the
> IGF to their proposal very seriously.

As with many diplomatic texts, one can read it a number of ways.  I guess you read the absence of specific reference to a new UN organization to "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible" etc. as reflecting a shift.  I read the larger thrust of the text and its references to prior pronouncements etc and don't come away confident there's an agreed shift, at least not yet.  But either way, if you're right they took reactions at the IGF to their proposal very seriously, why not say that?  Why not help strengthen the IGF's position by underscoring its value and the importance of global multistakeholder dialogue on this and related matters?  That's what I referred to, the no comment on the IGF dialogue, …
> 
> This is a very different text to what had been proposed,

Do you mean the by the Rio recs, or something else?

> and clearly
> indicates that there will be further discussion on the September
> meeting's recommendations, which is what civil society organisations
> from the three countries requested.
> 
> Multi-stakeholder participation in the observatory is not mentioned, but
> it is also not excluded. My assumption is that this was an oversight,
> rather than a deliberate attempt to make it 'intergovernmental'.

We are always being told, or telling ourselves, that the lack of mention of multistakeholder participation in these things is an oversight.  Given all the heated discussions on the matter, I find that increasingly difficult to swallow.  The lack of specific reference to a UN body is revealing, but the lack of specific reference to multistakeholderism is just a case of whoops, sorry, we forgot…?

The thrust still feels pretty intergovernmental, as in "The Leaders...emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a key global player."  

> However, I think that the absence of multi-stakeholder participation as
> a principle is very disappointing. It should have been mentioned upfront
> in the section on global governance reform. There are other references
> to participation from stakeholders.. but that is not enough.
> 
> Human rights text is fairly good, as is the IP text.

Yes
> 
> Need to still read the whole document carefully.

Yes

http://www.pravasitoday.com/read-tshwane-declaration-at-5th-ibsa-summit

Cheers,

Bill
> 
> On 19/10/11 18:24, William Drake wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
>> 
>>> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on
>>> Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September
>>> 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action. 
>> 
>> The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions to those
>> recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum convened in Nairobi
>> on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to pretend it didn't happen.
>> 
>>> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area
>>> that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this
>>> context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
>>> Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to
>>> monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular
>>> updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
>> 
>> The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA rather
>> than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder participation in the
>> Observatory is not needed.
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
> executive director, association for progressive communications
> www.apc.org
> po box 29755, melville 2109
> south africa
> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111019/eb1a78ed/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Wed Oct 19 23:36:13 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:36:13 +1200
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

I read with interest the following:

US requests China website censoring details
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10760429

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/128537ad/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 00:14:34 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:14:34 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiA+9aJ-dCDbDoQ5kJN4C6_DRf1Tew5HJACvBUFPTNwZOQ@mail.gmail.com>

Also interesting in the South China news, see

Tens of millions of dollars in legal aid is being pumped into a mounting
number of judicial review cases - many of them challenges to government
policies.......more at the URL below

http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=7cc6f93e2bc13310VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=Hong+Kong&s=News


On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 3:36 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I read with interest the following:
>
> US requests China website censoring details
>
> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10760429
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/3b70678b/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, 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


From toml at communisphere.com  Thu Oct 20 00:22:25 2011
From: toml at communisphere.com (Thomas Lowenhaupt)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:22:25 -0400
Subject: [governance] Considering a Common Pool Resource Approach to
 City-TLDs
Message-ID: <4E9FA201.2000902@communisphere.com>

It's been suggested that city-TLDs, such as .nyc, .london, .mumbai, and 
.paris, are "open greenfields for new local governance structures." And 
that they would most effectively serve the public interest if developed 
as digital commons.

How do we advance the idea that city-TLDs - and especially .nyc - are 
best developed as public interest resources?

David Bollier, an important voice for the commons - http://bollier.org/ 
- joins us at our weekly Tea and TLDs conference to imagine a governance 
structure that best assures a city-TLD's equitable development and long 
term vitality.

Join us this Thursday from 10-11 AM at our Google Hangout - 
http://bit.ly/NYCTLD -- for the conversation. If you can't make it, look 
to our blog -- http://bit.ly/OurBlog -- for a recording.

Best,

Tom Lowenhaupt

P.S. Also, see the countdown clock <http://connectingnyc.org/tick-tock/> 
on filing for the .nyc TLD.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/906a799e/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Thu Oct 20 04:05:25 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:05:25 +0200
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch>

Hi Sala

This is indeed an interesting development.  During the WSIS and thereafter, WTO staff and other trade people were rather equivocal when some of us argued that since the multilateral trade regimes apply to Internet commerce they constitute a form of global Internet governance.  They didn't want trade policy issues drawn into the IG space, inter alia because like the IPR people involved in WIPO & WTO they preferred to keep these solely within their institutional space.  But over the past couple years a growing number of trade analysts have begun to view FOE restrictions as trade restrictions, and Google & industry groups like the Computer & Communications Industry Association have picked up and pressed the argument.  This might present a little bit of a conundrum for folks who are both proponents of FOE and opponents of the WTO system…

China's restrictions on foreign-based websites & related operations may well be a violation of the GATS if its schedule of commitments doesn't carve them out under the relevant modes of supply like via networks or commercial presence.  China could try to argue that the restrictions are legal under the General Exceptions escape clause that allows measures necessary "to protect public morals or to maintain public order," but that works only if it can be shown that the services pose a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to the fundamental interests of society and the measures are nondiscriminatory and not a disguised restriction on trade in services.  If this goes to a dispute settlement panel, an important legal precedent, potentially backed by the option of trade sanctions, could ensue.  

Whether anyone would want to take the risk of acting on that option, and whether it'd even prove necessary, are other questions.  A couple years ago the  Appellate Body ruled against China in a dispute with the US over the importation of material publications and audiovisual products, finding that China's actions violated its accession agreement, the GATT, and the GATS, and specifically said that China had failed to show its actions were necessary to protect public morals.   I don't recall that this gave rise to sanctions though—I think they undertook some relaxation of restrictions in their distribution system.  Who knows if that could be a precedent…

Bill



On Oct 20, 2011, at 5:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> I read with interest the following:
> 
> US requests China website censoring details
> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10760429
> 
> -- 
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> 
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>  
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/68e738d1/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 20 05:30:32 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:30:32 +0500
Subject: [governance] Have you used Voting link for 2011 IGC coordinator
 election
Message-ID: <004201cc8f0a$ebf81210$c3e83630$@yahoo.com>

Dear All Members of the IGC CS,

With reference to the Election for one of the two positions of Coordinator
of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (IGC). 

This is just a soft reminder that if you have not utilized your vote, today
is the last date vote for the position of ICS CS Coordinator by using the
ballot send by Dr Jeremy. 

You have option to vote one of the following:

1.      Asif Kabani

2.      Sonigitu Ekpe

3.      Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro

4.      Imran Ahmed Shah

 

Thanking you and Best Regards

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/deb42077/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, 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


From hongxueipr at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 05:42:40 2011
From: hongxueipr at gmail.com (Hong Xue)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:42:40 +0800
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <CAMXzyHD-HOdY8Z0s3X5gDX2etr7Tckv6R4f0Ump17bUq+63PjQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, Bill, very interesting discussion. It's been quite a lot of discussions
on whether filtering/denial of access to certain online locations constitute
TBT in WTO. I recently raised this issue at UNESCAP trade facilitation forum
and discussed with a group of people from WTO and UNECE. The basic consensus
is that technical barriers to trade is merely for trade for (physical)
goods, not service. As you know, WTO is still pretty messy on how to
categorize e-commerce in the dichotomy. Basically it depends largely on the
actual "subject matters" of the transaction. However and most unfortunately,
no agreement can be reached on "digital things"  (well okay under copyright,
such as downloading via itune). I personally tend to deem them services,
which cannot be subject to trade restriction categories. The openness for
service trade, such as telecom, is very much subject to each country's
specific commitments made through negotiation.

Hong



On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:05 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

> Hi Sala
>
> This is indeed an interesting development.  During the WSIS and thereafter,
> WTO staff and other trade people were rather equivocal when some of us
> argued that since the multilateral trade regimes apply to Internet commerce
> they constitute a form of global Internet governance.  They didn't want
> trade policy issues drawn into the IG space, inter alia because like the IPR
> people involved in WIPO & WTO they preferred to keep these solely within
> their institutional space.  But over the past couple years a growing number
> of trade analysts have begun to view FOE restrictions as trade restrictions,
> and Google & industry groups like the Computer & Communications Industry
> Association have picked up and pressed the argument.  This might present a
> little bit of a conundrum for folks who are both proponents of FOE and
> opponents of the WTO system…
>
> China's restrictions on foreign-based websites & related operations may
> well be a violation of the GATS if its schedule of commitments doesn't carve
> them out under the relevant modes of supply like via networks or commercial
> presence.  China could try to argue that the restrictions are legal under
> the General Exceptions escape clause that allows measures necessary "to
> protect public morals or to maintain public order," but that works only if
> it can be shown that the services pose a genuine and sufficiently
> serious threat to the fundamental interests of society and the measures are
> nondiscriminatory and not a disguised restriction on trade in services.  If
> this goes to a dispute settlement panel, an important legal precedent,
> potentially backed by the option of trade sanctions, could ensue.
>
> Whether anyone would want to take the risk of acting on that option, and
> whether it'd even prove necessary, are other questions.  A couple years ago
> the  Appellate Body ruled against China in a dispute with the US over the
> importation of material publications and audiovisual products, finding that
> China's actions violated its accession agreement, the GATT, and the GATS,
> and specifically said that China had failed to show its actions were
> necessary to protect public morals.   I don't recall that this gave rise to
> sanctions though—I think they undertook some relaxation of restrictions in
> their distribution system.  Who knows if that could be a precedent…
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 5:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I read with interest the following:
>
> US requests China website censoring details
>
> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10760429
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Dr. Hong Xue
Professor of Law
Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
Beijing Normal University
http://www.iipl.org.cn/ <http://iipl.org.cn/>
19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
Beijing 100875 China
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/5b7db6f2/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 06:31:40 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 22:31:40 +1200
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCur=uLAaU-BFC79mKMHE3Y6mzcdgWCJbHjkwddbHT=kg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:05 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:

> Hi Sala
>
> This is indeed an interesting development.  During the WSIS and thereafter,
> WTO staff and other trade people were rather equivocal when some of us
> argued that since the multilateral trade regimes apply to Internet commerce
> they constitute a form of global Internet governance.  They didn't want
> trade policy issues drawn into the IG space, inter alia because like the IPR
> people involved in WIPO & WTO they preferred to keep these solely within
> their institutional space.
>

Yes I thought that it was an interesting evolution. What is equally
interesting is that at the end of the day trade positions and interests
exist to benefit countries and governments are finding that they have to
reconsider certain positions when global corporates/multinationals can
easily choose to be established in jurisdictions that not only give optimum
return but where they can freely carry out their respective business
objectives. What to me is exciting about the evolution is how this global
borderless thing called the internet and with companies like Google that has
caches and presence all over the world, they would demand for the free flow
of their services without hinderance, ie. removal of barriers.

To me this is where it gets interesting and I think in months to come La
Rue's Report as Special Rapporteur on Access will be analysed in a different
light. It will most certainly be interesting to see economic rights and
political rights interplay and how the balance is achieved.



>  But over the past couple years a growing number of trade analysts have
> begun to view FOE restrictions as trade restrictions, and Google & industry
> groups like the Computer & Communications Industry Association have picked
> up and pressed the argument.
>
One of the goals of the Taskforce on Internet Telecom Infrastructure and
Services (ITIS) which is part of the International Chamber of Commerce is to
"Promote liberalization of trade in telecommunications and information
technology markets with the World Trade Organization (WTO), with other
international organizations and with national authorities. " See:
http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/id9260/index.html


> This might present a little bit of a conundrum for folks who are both
> proponents of FOE and opponents of the WTO system…
>
Interesting indeed :)

>
> China's restrictions on foreign-based websites & related operations may
> well be a violation of the GATS if its schedule of commitments doesn't carve
> them out under the relevant modes of supply like via networks or commercial
> presence.  China could try to argue that the restrictions are legal under
> the General Exceptions escape clause that allows measures necessary "to
> protect public morals or to maintain public order," but that works only if
> it can be shown that the services pose a genuine and sufficiently
> serious threat to the fundamental interests of society and the measures are
> nondiscriminatory and not a disguised restriction on trade in services.  If
> this goes to a dispute settlement panel, an important legal precedent,
> potentially backed by the option of trade sanctions, could ensue.
>
> Whether anyone would want to take the risk of acting on that option, and
> whether it'd even prove necessary, are other questions.
>


>  A couple years ago the  Appellate Body ruled against China in a dispute
> with the US over the importation of material publications and audiovisual
> products, finding that China's actions violated its accession agreement, the
> GATT, and the GATS, and specifically said that China had failed to show its
> actions were necessary to protect public morals.
>

Interesting.

> I don't recall that this gave rise to sanctions though—I think they
> undertook some relaxation of restrictions in their distribution system.  Who
> knows if that could be a precedent…
>
And time will certainly tell :)

>
> Bill
>
>
>
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 5:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I read with interest the following:
>
> US requests China website censoring details
>
> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10760429
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/2994e195/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Thu Oct 20 07:01:19 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:01:19 +0200
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <CAMXzyHD-HOdY8Z0s3X5gDX2etr7Tckv6R4f0Ump17bUq+63PjQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com> <16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch> <CAMXzyHD-HOdY8Z0s3X5gDX2etr7Tckv6R4f0Ump17bUq+63PjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <24C3365D-4786-4515-B360-339A42FD47E4@uzh.ch>

Hi Hong

On Oct 20, 2011, at 11:42 AM, Hong Xue wrote:

> 
> Hi, Bill, very interesting discussion. It's been quite a lot of discussions on whether filtering/denial of access to certain online locations constitute TBT in WTO. I recently raised this issue at UNESCAP trade facilitation forum and discussed with a group of people from WTO and UNECE. The basic consensus is that technical barriers to trade is merely for trade for (physical) goods, not service.

Yes, the trade facilitation discussion on TBT focuses more on the material world---customs and related exciting stuff.  But I don't think the argument being made is that censoring sites is a TBT or a matter of  trade facilitation.

> As you know, WTO is still pretty messy on how to categorize e-commerce in the dichotomy. Basically it depends largely on the actual "subject matters" of the transaction.
> However and most unfortunately, no agreement can be reached on "digital things"  (well okay under copyright, such as downloading via itune).

Messy indeed.  A main polarity has been between the EU and US.  The EU has argued that "digital things" must be classified as services and under the GATS for various reasons, ontological as well as consistency with its single market agenda, its exclusion of audio-visual services from its liberalization commitments in the Uruguay Round, privacy protection, and ultimately because GATS disciplines are weaker and more flexible than GATT's.  The US has inclined toward the arguments from the software & other content industries that it doesn't matter if one ships across a border in shrink wrap or in bits if the things function like goods.  A colleague and I did a piece over a decade ago arguing that negotiators should define clear criteria differentiating goods from services rather than having dispute settlement panels legislate this, and that products delivered electronically should be considered goods if they are locally stored and transferable between buyers (that is if their function and contractual value become independent from the intervention of the supplier at the time of transaction).  But probably we're drifting off topic for this list...

> I personally tend to deem them services, which cannot be subject to trade restriction categories. The openness for service trade, such as telecom, is very much subject to each country's specific commitments made through negotiation.   

Not sure i understand the first sentence, but as stated I agree with the second.

Cheers

Bill
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:05 PM, William Drake <william.drake at uzh.ch> wrote:
> Hi Sala
> 
> This is indeed an interesting development.  During the WSIS and thereafter, WTO staff and other trade people were rather equivocal when some of us argued that since the multilateral trade regimes apply to Internet commerce they constitute a form of global Internet governance.  They didn't want trade policy issues drawn into the IG space, inter alia because like the IPR people involved in WIPO & WTO they preferred to keep these solely within their institutional space.  But over the past couple years a growing number of trade analysts have begun to view FOE restrictions as trade restrictions, and Google & industry groups like the Computer & Communications Industry Association have picked up and pressed the argument.  This might present a little bit of a conundrum for folks who are both proponents of FOE and opponents of the WTO system…
> 
> China's restrictions on foreign-based websites & related operations may well be a violation of the GATS if its schedule of commitments doesn't carve them out under the relevant modes of supply like via networks or commercial presence.  China could try to argue that the restrictions are legal under the General Exceptions escape clause that allows measures necessary "to protect public morals or to maintain public order," but that works only if it can be shown that the services pose a genuine and sufficiently serious threat to the fundamental interests of society and the measures are nondiscriminatory and not a disguised restriction on trade in services.  If this goes to a dispute settlement panel, an important legal precedent, potentially backed by the option of trade sanctions, could ensue.  
> 
> Whether anyone would want to take the risk of acting on that option, and whether it'd even prove necessary, are other questions.  A couple years ago the  Appellate Body ruled against China in a dispute with the US over the importation of material publications and audiovisual products, finding that China's actions violated its accession agreement, the GATT, and the GATS, and specifically said that China had failed to show its actions were necessary to protect public morals.   I don't recall that this gave rise to sanctions though—I think they undertook some relaxation of restrictions in their distribution system.  Who knows if that could be a precedent…
> 
> Bill
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 5:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> 
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> I read with interest the following:
>> 
>> US requests China website censoring details
>> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10760429
>> 
>> -- 
>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>> 
>> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
>> Cell: +679 998 2851
>>  
>> 
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Dr. Hong Xue
> Professor of Law
> Director of Institute for the Internet Policy & Law (IIPL)
> Beijing Normal University
> http://www.iipl.org.cn/
> 19 Xin Jie Kou Wai Street
> Beijing 100875 China

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/744ab96b/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, 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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Thu Oct 20 07:12:47 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:12:47 +0300
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <24C3365D-4786-4515-B360-339A42FD47E4@uzh.ch>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com> <16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch> <CAMXzyHD-HOdY8Z0s3X5gDX2etr7Tckv6R4f0Ump17bUq+63PjQ@mail.gmail.com> <24C3365D-4786-4515-B360-339A42FD47E4@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4EA0022F.30600@digsys.bg>



On 20.10.11 14:01, William Drake wrote:
> The US has inclined toward the arguments from the software & other 
> content industries that it doesn't matter if one ships across a border 
> in shrink wrap or in bits if the things function like goods.

Interesting times to come, when teleportation becomes reality.

Daniel
____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 07:18:19 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 23:18:19 +1200
Subject: [governance] US requests China website censoring details
In-Reply-To: <4EA0022F.30600@digsys.bg>
References: <CAJwbTiAbn1P8bZH6NBXy3gJcTrUaAmq61p9tg9DQHcfGNbVk6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<16C52D0E-A101-4707-990E-33814F05389A@uzh.ch>
	<CAMXzyHD-HOdY8Z0s3X5gDX2etr7Tckv6R4f0Ump17bUq+63PjQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<24C3365D-4786-4515-B360-339A42FD47E4@uzh.ch>
	<4EA0022F.30600@digsys.bg>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiAwQffbQuF3ssYf03VBGHpbd9gbz=-0J8nwbsPUZw46JA@mail.gmail.com>

Well if you can fax in 3D....



On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:12 PM, Daniel Kalchev <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

>
>
> On 20.10.11 14:01, William Drake wrote:
>
>> The US has inclined toward the arguments from the software & other content
>> industries that it doesn't matter if one ships across a border in shrink
>> wrap or in bits if the things function like goods.
>>
>
> Interesting times to come, when teleportation becomes reality.
>
> Daniel
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/08cb0c1e/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, 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


From jeremy at ciroap.org  Thu Oct 20 07:18:31 2011
From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 19:18:31 +0800
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
Message-ID: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>

Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator and returning officer.

99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26 (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%) for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who are encouraged to re-apply next year.

6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.

In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above" option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the above" option.

In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do you think?

The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new role.

-- 
Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/c509004d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2212 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/c509004d/attachment.bin>

From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 07:24:04 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 07:24:04 -0400
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6nbuY=e9zjO4iHBg8oUndJLGpcZ7xiAp1pOH9Q+89xJg@mail.gmail.com>

Congratulations Sala and thank you Jeremy for all your hard work over the
last two years.
If I can help with the Charter review please let me know
best wishes
Deirdre

On 20 October 2011 07:18, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
> coordinator and returning officer.
>
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
> above" option.
>
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
> you think?
>
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/beaf0a93/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 07:26:52 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 23:26:52 +1200
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

Firstly this is humbling and I thank you sincerely for your confidence and
hope to serve you. I would also like to thank my comrades Songitu, Asif and
Imran, and hope that you run again next year.

I would also like to thank Jeremy for the nomination and Bill for seconding
it and all those that supported it. I do no intend to fill in nor try to
fill in Jeremy's shoes - they are far too big :) Jeremy as we all know has
done tremendous work and so I thank you Jeremy. I look forward to being
briefed by Jeremy and Izumi.

I am actually in Seoul waiting for my flight to Dubai which leaves in 3
hours.

Again thank you for allowing me the privilege to be your serve you.

Best Regards,
Sala

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
> coordinator and returning officer.
>
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
> above" option.
>
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
> you think?
>
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/0d508075/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, 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


From sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng  Thu Oct 20 07:29:01 2011
From: sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng (Sonigitu Ekpe)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:29:01 +0100
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CALLeeasjej+bW85jWSW8LWTANCs5OVyJAzm9REjuiAGaWHwwvA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Sala,

Congratulations in emerging as the new IGC Coordinator.

Once gain congratulations!!!!!!!

Sonigitu Ekpe
(aka) Sea

On 20 Oct 2011 12:19, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator
and returning officer.

99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
(24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
are encouraged to re-apply next year.

6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.

In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
above" option.

In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
you think?

The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
role.

-- 

*Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
protect and empower consumers everywhere.
*www.consumersinternational.org*
*Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*

Read our email confidentiality
notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
Don't print this email unless necessary.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/6f05960e/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 07:32:50 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 23:32:50 +1200
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <CALLeeasjej+bW85jWSW8LWTANCs5OVyJAzm9REjuiAGaWHwwvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
	<CALLeeasjej+bW85jWSW8LWTANCs5OVyJAzm9REjuiAGaWHwwvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiDE5ZDx3J=-YEUF0bHcZ3t005GtTn88jS1JAE7u_72j_g@mail.gmail.com>

Dear Sea,

Thank you my friend, I will be relying on you and also drawing from your
wisdom.

Best,
Sala

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:29 PM, Sonigitu Ekpe <
sonigituekpe at crossriverstate.gov.ng> wrote:

> Dear Sala,
>
> Congratulations in emerging as the new IGC Coordinator.
>
> Once gain congratulations!!!!!!!
>
> Sonigitu Ekpe
> (aka) Sea
>
> On 20 Oct 2011 12:19, "Jeremy Malcolm" <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
> coordinator and returning officer.
>
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
> above" option.
>
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
> you think?
>
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> 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, 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
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/7ffa0406/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, 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


From KovenRonald at aol.com  Thu Oct 20 07:34:51 2011
From: KovenRonald at aol.com (KovenRonald at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 07:34:51 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
Message-ID: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com>

Dear All --

I didn't vote because i didn't get a very clear idea who the candidates 
were. But I still want to be active in the IGC. I therefore think there should 
be a way to vote, exoressing interest in the IGC, without stating a 
preference for a candidate.

Rather than "none of the above," I suggest there be provision for 
"abstain," which casts aspersions on nobody, while showing attachment to the caucus.

With a couple of notable exceptions, voting isn't a requirement of 
citizenship. And even in countries where voting is required explicitly (Australia, 
Belgium) or implicitly (Italy), one can, after all cast a blank or spoiled 
ballot. 

Best regards, Rony Koven
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/10611243/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, 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


From ias_pk at yahoo.com  Thu Oct 20 07:38:34 2011
From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:38:34 +0500
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <00ed01cc8f1c$cff68e40$6fe3aac0$@yahoo.com>

Thanks to Dr Jeremy,

Congratulation to Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.

Very interesting that one lawyer is replacing another lawyer. 

Hopefully, Sala will also be very helpful for the coordinating and
representing IGC CS.

 

I also agree with the Dr Jeremy, for the provisioning in voting for "non
from the proposed options" and also vote to add this option in the Charter
as well.

 

Thanking you and Best Regards

 

Imran Ahmad Shah

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Jeremy Malcolm
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 04:19 PM
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
elections

 

Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator
and returning officer.

 

99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
(24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
are encouraged to re-apply next year.

 

6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.

 

In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
above" option.

 

In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
you think?

 

The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
role.

 

-- 

Dr 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

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/> 
Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int> 

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> . Don't print
this email unless necessary.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/a2b35a82/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, 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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct 20 07:47:09 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 12:47:09 +0100
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com>
References: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <5U83H+29oAoOFA1w@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a at aol.com>, at 07:34:51 on Thu, 20 Oct 
2011, KovenRonald at aol.com writes
>Rather than "none of the above," I suggest there be provision for 
>"abstain," which casts aspersions on nobody, while showing attachment 
>to the caucus.
>
>With a couple of notable exceptions, voting isn't a requirement of 
>citizenship. And even in countries where voting is required explicitly 
>(Australia, Belgium) or implicitly (Italy), one can, after all cast a 
>blank or spoiled ballot.

A simple technical workaround would be to allow people to vote for 
multiple (rather than just one) candidates, and thus spoil their paper 
in the same way they would in a conventional election. I don't think 
that's something which should require a charter change.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Oct 20 08:25:15 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:25:15 -0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org> <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca>

OK, my tokens on this:

- It is obvious there was a shift and I am sure Brazil took into account
our (BR ngos') insistent dialogue on the issues with them.

- The Tshwane Declaration shows the IBSA efforts are far broader than
Internet-related issues, and at least BR ngos are interested in the
whole set of themes they are dealing with, not just whether Icann's butt
will be kicked or not.

- The "thrust" (whatever the meaning in this context) of the declaration
of an intergovernmental meeting, Bill, is intergovernmental, what else
would you expect?

I would insist our compas north of the Equator, and especially west of
Greenwich :) be a bit more neutral when analyzing joint
intergovernmental efforts from the South, and always remember to take a
look at their own govs' tails first.

frt rgds

--c.a.

On 10/19/2011 04:05 PM, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Anriette
> 
> We just had this conversation bilaterally, but sure let's open it up...
> 
> On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:25 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
> 
>> Hi Bill
>>
>> I think your response is a bit hasty. There are serious gaps.. e.g. the
>> lack of emphasis on multi-stakeholder participation pointed out by
>> Sivasubramanian, but overall I think the section on IG shows very
>> clearly that the IBSA government representatives took reactions at the
>> IGF to their proposal very seriously.
> 
> As with many diplomatic texts, one can read it a number of ways.  I guess you read the absence of specific reference to a new UN organization to "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible" etc. as reflecting a shift.  I read the larger thrust of the text and its references to prior pronouncements etc and don't come away confident there's an agreed shift, at least not yet.  But either way, if you're right they took reactions at the IGF to their proposal very seriously, why not say that?  Why not help strengthen the IGF's position by underscoring its value and the importance of global multistakeholder dialogue on this and related matters?  That's what I referred to, the no comment on the IGF dialogue, …
>>
>> This is a very different text to what had been proposed,
> 
> Do you mean the by the Rio recs, or something else?
> 
>> and clearly
>> indicates that there will be further discussion on the September
>> meeting's recommendations, which is what civil society organisations
>> from the three countries requested.
>>
>> Multi-stakeholder participation in the observatory is not mentioned, but
>> it is also not excluded. My assumption is that this was an oversight,
>> rather than a deliberate attempt to make it 'intergovernmental'.
> 
> We are always being told, or telling ourselves, that the lack of mention of multistakeholder participation in these things is an oversight.  Given all the heated discussions on the matter, I find that increasingly difficult to swallow.  The lack of specific reference to a UN body is revealing, but the lack of specific reference to multistakeholderism is just a case of whoops, sorry, we forgot…?
> 
> The thrust still feels pretty intergovernmental, as in "The Leaders...emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a key global player."  
> 
>> However, I think that the absence of multi-stakeholder participation as
>> a principle is very disappointing. It should have been mentioned upfront
>> in the section on global governance reform. There are other references
>> to participation from stakeholders.. but that is not enough.
>>
>> Human rights text is fairly good, as is the IP text.
> 
> Yes
>>
>> Need to still read the whole document carefully.
> 
> Yes
> 
> http://www.pravasitoday.com/read-tshwane-declaration-at-5th-ibsa-summit
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Bill
>>
>> On 19/10/11 18:24, William Drake wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
>>>
>>>> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on
>>>> Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September
>>>> 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action. 
>>>
>>> The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions to those
>>> recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum convened in Nairobi
>>> on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to pretend it didn't happen.
>>>
>>>> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area
>>>> that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this
>>>> context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
>>>> Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to
>>>> monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular
>>>> updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
>>>
>>> The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA rather
>>> than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder participation in the
>>> Observatory is not needed.
>>
>> -- 
>> ------------------------------------------------------
>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>> www.apc.org
>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>> south africa
>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From ofdral at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 09:07:38 2011
From: ofdral at gmail.com (Dan Ofori)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:07:38 +0000
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <5U83H+29oAoOFA1w@internetpolicyagency.com>
References: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com>
	<5U83H+29oAoOFA1w@internetpolicyagency.com>
Message-ID: <CAMKc=Ss4vgmjYmzF3z3nSQD-pFv1EKeHj3R5-gaEEX+hE9X_rQ@mail.gmail.com>

Congrats Sala

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Roland Perry <
roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:

> In message <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a at aol.**com<3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a at aol.com>>,
> at 07:34:51 on Thu, 20 Oct 2011, KovenRonald at aol.com writes
>
>  Rather than "none of the above," I suggest there be provision for
>> "abstain," which casts aspersions on nobody, while showing attachment to the
>> caucus.
>>
>> With a couple of notable exceptions, voting isn't a requirement of
>> citizenship. And even in countries where voting is required explicitly
>> (Australia, Belgium) or implicitly (Italy), one can, after all cast a blank
>> or spoiled ballot.
>>
>
> A simple technical workaround would be to allow people to vote for multiple
> (rather than just one) candidates, and thus spoil their paper in the same
> way they would in a conventional election. I don't think that's something
> which should require a charter change.
> --
> Roland Perry
>
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Ofori
Accra,Ghana
(T:)+233-244-730989
(E:) ofdral at gmail.com
skype: ofdral
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/2cd0d537/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 09:36:19 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:36:19 +1200
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks =
 Access ?
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All,

I was looking for something on the International Chamber of Commerce website
and found an Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum Shortage
requires immediate action, see:
http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201 It's relevance to
internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms of access for
consumers etc.


Also an interesting article was published in Trinidad today, see an article
called "Not Quite An App for That Yet" by Bevil Wooding, see:
http://www.guardian.co.tt/business-guardian/2011/10/20/not-quite-yet-app

on Mobile Networks holding back innovation...

Cheers,
-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/9ff680b6/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 09:42:02 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:42:02 +1200
Subject: [governance] Re: Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiBFKmX+Vkm1tyv4pms1GL=wJXkCS7RHpj8N4JvEbWvzWw@mail.gmail.com>

Pardon me  for the typo it's almost midnight and am tired of waiting for my
flight ...should read "found an interesting article on" in the second line.

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I was looking for something on the International Chamber of Commerce
> website and found an Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum
> Shortage requires immediate action, see:
> http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201 It's relevance to
> internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms of access for
> consumers etc.
>
>
> Also an interesting article was published in Trinidad today, see an article
> called "Not Quite An App for That Yet" by Bevil Wooding, see:
> http://www.guardian.co.tt/business-guardian/2011/10/20/not-quite-yet-app
>
> on Mobile Networks holding back innovation...
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/32e01d16/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, 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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct 20 09:51:03 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 14:51:03 +0100
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <y6CVsFFHdCoOFA3i@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message 
<CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA at mail.gmail.com>, at 
01:36:19 on Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro 
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> writes
>Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum Shortage requires 
>immediate action, 
>see: http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201 It's 
>relevance to internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms 
>of access for consumers etc

I was at a meeting in UK Parliament last week where the mobile networks 
admitted (for the UK at least) that available spectrum and base-station 
rollout were limiting factors in the ability to provide 
multi-gigabyte-per-month mobile Internet access to subscribers.

And that 4G wasn't going to cure it, merely paper over the cracks for a 
few years. The solution seemed to be handing off traffic to wifi points 
(with a subscription included with your mobile) whenever possible.

Only one of the four networks has a product which does that, yet.

The governance question is perhaps: does freedom of expression *require* 
that everyone (and I do mean everyone, on average) downloads a gigabyte 
of YouTube to their mobile every month, or is a few tens of megabytes of 
email and website browsing sufficient to qualify for that?
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Oct 20 09:53:35 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:53:35 -0200
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EA027DF.6020205@cafonso.ca>

As usual when business asks for "immediate action" on something, let us
be careful on this.

Spectrum bids are won by big telcos who in many cases win these bids for
 a preemptive strategy -- hoarding big chunks of spectrum to block other
competitors, even more so where regulators are weak or biased towards
big business. This needs to be analyzed on a case by case basis with a
review of actual deployment of services and real demand, as well as the
focus of universal service (which in many cases is not imposed in the
incumbent contracts by the regulators).

--c.a.

On 10/20/2011 11:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> I was looking for something on the International Chamber of Commerce website
> and found an Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum Shortage
> requires immediate action, see:
> http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201 It's relevance to
> internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms of access for
> consumers etc.
> 
> 
> Also an interesting article was published in Trinidad today, see an article
> called "Not Quite An App for That Yet" by Bevil Wooding, see:
> http://www.guardian.co.tt/business-guardian/2011/10/20/not-quite-yet-app
> 
> on Mobile Networks holding back innovation...
> 
> Cheers,
____________________________________________________________
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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 09:55:35 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:55:35 +1200
Subject: [governance] Thailand
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiCSt8QfTBDLwGbhgoKD0STTnLEKdwsT_AQt9FV5h3zWKw@mail.gmail.com>

Hope our friends in Thailand are ok:
http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=51e3aaf581f13310VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=Asia+%26+World&s=News

-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/06c64871/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 09:58:03 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 01:58:03 +1200
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <y6CVsFFHdCoOFA3i@internetpolicyagency.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<y6CVsFFHdCoOFA3i@internetpolicyagency.com>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg@mail.gmail.com>

Yes I also watched on Telecom TV something about Wifi being the solution as
not only indoor but outdoor as well. It was at a Broadband Conference in
Paris and one of the Providers, I may have sent the link or tweeted it -
can't remember.



On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:51 AM, Roland Perry <
roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:

> In message <CAJwbTiB_**K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=**
> WQvs6FrRNVdA at mail.gmail.com <WQvs6FrRNVdA at mail.gmail.com>>, at 01:36:19 on
> Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro@**gmail.com<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com>>
> writes
>
>  Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum Shortage requires
>> immediate action, see: http://www.iccwbo.org/**
>> policy/ebitt/index.html?id=**46201<http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201> It's
>> relevance to internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms of
>> access for consumers etc
>>
>
> I was at a meeting in UK Parliament last week where the mobile networks
> admitted (for the UK at least) that available spectrum and base-station
> rollout were limiting factors in the ability to provide
> multi-gigabyte-per-month mobile Internet access to subscribers.
>
> And that 4G wasn't going to cure it, merely paper over the cracks for a few
> years. The solution seemed to be handing off traffic to wifi points (with a
> subscription included with your mobile) whenever possible.
>
> Only one of the four networks has a product which does that, yet.
>
> The governance question is perhaps: does freedom of expression *require*
> that everyone (and I do mean everyone, on average) downloads a gigabyte of
> YouTube to their mobile every month, or is a few tens of megabytes of email
> and website browsing sufficient to qualify for that?
> --
> Roland Perry
> ______________________________**______________________________
> 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<http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/**info/governance<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<http://translate.google.com/translate_t>
>
>


-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/490cbcb3/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, 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


From b.schombe at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 10:03:54 2011
From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:03:54 +0100
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAHj_20jTM4R72n75g9vz6PvpYa0DLXGd4HPqou+d1kJVohrYOQ@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Sala,

FELICITATIONS
CONGRATS


SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN

Téléphone mobile:+243998983491
email                  : b.schombe at gmail.com
skype                 : b.schombe
blog                    : http://akimambo.unblog.fr
Site Web             : www.ticafrica.net





2011/10/20 Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>

> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
> coordinator and returning officer.
>
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
> above" option.
>
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
> you think?
>
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/0b99f2bb/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, 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


From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 10:04:33 2011
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 02:04:33 +1200
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <4EA027DF.6020205@cafonso.ca>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4EA027DF.6020205@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <CAJwbTiA7HqMwecyUTYRvS2+_sb=bmeXHV7TnWkK0v1kJujeZrQ@mail.gmail.com>

And in the US this was on TV today:
AT&T offers up spectrum, as states join DoJ lawsuit

http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=48059&id=e9381817-0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:

> As usual when business asks for "immediate action" on something, let us
> be careful on this.
>
> Spectrum bids are won by big telcos who in many cases win these bids for
>  a preemptive strategy -- hoarding big chunks of spectrum to block other
> competitors, even more so where regulators are weak or biased towards
> big business. This needs to be analyzed on a case by case basis with a
> review of actual deployment of services and real demand, as well as the
> focus of universal service (which in many cases is not imposed in the
> incumbent contracts by the regulators).
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 10/20/2011 11:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> > Dear All,
> >
> > I was looking for something on the International Chamber of Commerce
> website
> > and found an Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum Shortage
> > requires immediate action, see:
> > http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201 It's relevance to
> > internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms of access for
> > consumers etc.
> >
> >
> > Also an interesting article was published in Trinidad today, see an
> article
> > called "Not Quite An App for That Yet" by Bevil Wooding, see:
> > http://www.guardian.co.tt/business-guardian/2011/10/20/not-quite-yet-app
> >
> > on Mobile Networks holding back innovation...
> >
> > Cheers,
>



-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

Tweeter: @SalanietaT
Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
Cell: +679 998 2851
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/3754475d/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, 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


From charlespmok at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 10:07:30 2011
From: charlespmok at gmail.com (Charles Mok (gmail))
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 22:07:30 +0800
Subject: [governance] Thailand
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiCSt8QfTBDLwGbhgoKD0STTnLEKdwsT_AQt9FV5h3zWKw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiCSt8QfTBDLwGbhgoKD0STTnLEKdwsT_AQt9FV5h3zWKw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHvfLm2ZPnpw5zuuxfi4H8-EAxiL8Ko8FqLjoHCTP_1bqDk5rw@mail.gmail.com>

Thailand in crisis as floods to hit BangkokReuters in Bangkok
Updated on *Oct 20, 2011*Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra said on Thursday
Thailand was in crisis and the government was struggling to cope as the
worst floods in half a century threatened to engulf the capital, Bangkok.

Yingluck, under fire for her management of the flooding that has killed at
least 320 people since July and devastated industrialised provinces in the
centre of the country, called for national unity in the face of the crisis.

“I have to admit the government can't keep a close eye on every spot. Now is
a time of national crisis. Everybody should work together,” she said at a
crisis centre set up at Bangkok's Don Muang airport.

“Blaming each other won't help. Today we need unity to solve the problem,”
she added.

One inner city area was under threat on Thursday after floodwater breached a
waterworks canal, officials said.

Shelters for as many as 45,000 people were being prepared as a precaution,
as residents of several northern districts packed up their belongings and
left or waded waist-deep through normally bustling shopping streets.

The worst flooding in half a century now covers a third of Thailand's
provinces, some 4 million acres (1.6 million hectares) in the north,
northeast and centre of the country.

Huge industrial estates to the north of Bangkok have been swamped and the
central bank put the damage to industry at more than 100 billion baht
(US$3.3 billion) on Thursday.

It has been raising interest rates for more than a year to fight inflation
but it left them unchanged at a meeting on Wednesday and said on Thursday it
was ready to call a special meeting to cut them if necessary.

Japan's Sony said on Thursday it would delay the launch of several new
cameras due in November after floods forced it to halt production at some
Thai plants.

The output of Japanese car makers has fallen by about 6,000 units a day
because of the flooding.

Rice traders and industry analysts said as much as 3.5 million tonnes of
paddy, equivalent to 2 million tonnes of milled rice, may have been damaged
and loading of 100,000 tonnes may have been delayed because of the flooding.

Thailand is the world's biggest rice exporter.

Bank of Thailand Governor Prasarn Trairatvorakul said economic growth this
year could be more than one percentage point less than the 4.1 per cent the
central bank has forecast.

Finance Minister Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala said on Tuesday it may be just
a bit more than 2 per cent.

The damage to the economy will be far higher if flooding hits Bangkok, which
accounts for 41 per cent of GDP.

Pracha Promnok, justice minister and head of the government crisis centre,
said city officials had been pumping water out overnight in the Samsen and
Makkasan areas, which are just north of the royal palace and other prime
tourist sites.

“If we can't control the situation or things go wrong with the water pumping
machine or we can't pump water in time, then there's a chance that our
Bangkok will be swamped,” Pracha told Channel 3 television, adding that the
water level in the morning was still manageable.

Water from the north is flowing towards Bangkok and the authorities have
been trying desperately to divert it around the inner city using a defensive
system of dikes and canals.

The immediate danger seemed to have passed at the weekend, when high estuary
tides and heavy rain added to the problem, but residents are braced for
trouble again.

In one northern district, floodwater flowed into the canals as villagers
tried desperately to repair an embankment with improvised sandbags. Some
people waded through waist-high water, others rowed through shopping streets
on makeshift rafts.

“I'm really scared, I couldn't sleep last night. I heard the water would
come. I didn't know what to do,” said Sakor Byuanpanat, 54, in the Sai Mai
district, whose home was knee-deep in water.

A survey of 415 residents in Bangkok and nearby provinces by pollsters at
Assumption University this week showed 87 per cent thought the government's
information was unreliable.

Concern about contaminated tap water prompted Bangkok residents to rush to
buy bottled water on Thursday. One central supermarket run by Big C Super
centre had sold out.

Some 162 shelters have been prepared in case of evacuation and people in
seven districts in the northeast of Bangkok were told to prepare for
flooding. About 200 families were evacuated late on Wednesday and people
were told to move cars and valuables to higher ground.

Pracha said the flow of water down from Nava Nakorn, a big industrial estate
north of Bangkok that is completely flooded, and elsewhere in Pathum Thani
province was strong but the dikes were holding.

Prasarn said economic growth could be more than one percentage point less
than the 4.1 per cent the central bank has forecast and Finance Minister
Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala told reporters on Tuesday growth may be only a
bit more than 2 per cent.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:55 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <
salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hope our friends in Thailand are ok:
> http://www.scmp.com/portal/site/SCMP/menuitem.2c913216495213d5df646910cba0a0a0/?vgnextoid=51e3aaf581f13310VgnVCM100000360a0a0aRCRD&vgnextfmt=teaser&ss=Asia+%26+World&s=News
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/aecca16f/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, 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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct 20 10:16:20 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:16:20 +0100
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <y6CVsFFHdCoOFA3i@internetpolicyagency.com>
 <CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FJ+og+I00CoOFATD@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message 
<CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg at mail.gmail.com>, at 
01:58:03 on Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro 
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> writes
>Yes I also watched on Telecom TV something about Wifi being the 
>solution as not only indoor but outdoor as well.

The idea is to bundle a subscription to widely deployed wifi hotspots 
"outdoors". The next stage is cleverer - persuade households with a 
landline (cable or ADSL) Internet connection to share their wifi with 
suitably authenticated third parties who just happen to be within 100 
metres.

Years ago there were many proposals for "meshes" which would have had a 
similar characteristic, but they seem to have fallen by the wayside.
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From iza at anr.org  Thu Oct 20 10:42:25 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 23:42:25 +0900
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKjNdcDoQ=trHirFp_KRs=skONqnADBwVBS_q8CSGb0HRA@mail.gmail.com>

Congratulations Sala and I am very happy to welcome her as my partner
for the coming year.

Thank you Songitu, Asif and Imran for making the multiple choice for
this election and I would congratulate each of you as the strong potential
partner with me. Please remain committed with IGC and hope you to run
again next year.

I also like to express my gratitude wholeheartedly to Jeremy for your
dedication, steady works including the upgrading our website, managing
the election process, mailing list, etc. Without you, I could not
fulfill my duty.

Thank you all for casting your votes. With the second phase of the IGF
now facing the "improvements" debate, I think it is crucial for the civil
society to make real relevance to the IGF debate, upgrade the whole
IGF, especially for development, and in that regard I welcome Sala
once again from the small island state in South Pacific.

izumi

2011/10/20 Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>:
> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator
> and returning officer.
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
> above" option.
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
> you think?
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
> --
>
> Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org
> Twitter @ConsumersInt
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless
> necessary.
>



-- 
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<
          Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo
           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita,
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
                              www.anr.org
____________________________________________________________
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


From jcurran at istaff.org  Thu Oct 20 10:51:06 2011
From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 10:51:06 -0400
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <FJ+og+I00CoOFATD@internetpolicyagency.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com> <y6CVsFFHdCoOFA3i@internetpolicyagency.com> <CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg@mail.gmail.com> <FJ+og+I00CoOFATD@internetpolicyagency.com>
Message-ID: <12A7DC23-C828-49B0-B335-44D8F3E9A6C5@istaff.org>

On Oct 20, 2011, at 10:16 AM, Roland Perry wrote:

> In message <CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg at mail.gmail.com>, at 01:58:03 on Fri, 21 Oct 2011, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro <salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> writes
>> Yes I also watched on Telecom TV something about Wifi being the solution as not only indoor but outdoor as well.
> 
> The idea is to bundle a subscription to widely deployed wifi hotspots "outdoors". The next stage is cleverer - persuade households with a landline (cable or ADSL) Internet connection to share their wifi with suitably authenticated third parties who just happen to be within 100 metres.
> 
> Years ago there were many proposals for "meshes" which would have had a similar characteristic, but they seem to have fallen by the wayside.

Just FYI - To the extent that you want to enable similar 
"mesh" network solutions which rely on household Internet 
connectivity, it is important to lay some groundwork re 
the terms of the Internet service agreements for consumers 
first.  While not enforced (to my knowledge), you'll find 
that the typical home broadband term of service precludes
anything other personal/residential use via your local LAN,
and some go as far to preclude the use of any equipment 
which would provide sharing of network service to others.  

While this doesn't really prevent the informal sharing that
occurs nearly everywhere, it makes it challenging to build 
an actual service offer on top of a mesh of home Internet 
connections.

FYI,
/John

____________________________________________________________
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


From roland at internetpolicyagency.com  Thu Oct 20 11:09:31 2011
From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:09:31 +0100
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <12A7DC23-C828-49B0-B335-44D8F3E9A6C5@istaff.org>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>
 <y6CVsFFHdCoOFA3i@internetpolicyagency.com>
 <CAJwbTiA+8mNLpDGY1nfHnrQcStCN43ZMc57CX3JdW44+MAF7Dg@mail.gmail.com>
 <FJ+og+I00CoOFATD@internetpolicyagency.com>
 <12A7DC23-C828-49B0-B335-44D8F3E9A6C5@istaff.org>
Message-ID: <9+5WdXSrmDoOFAHt@internetpolicyagency.com>

In message <12A7DC23-C828-49B0-B335-44D8F3E9A6C5 at istaff.org>, at 
10:51:06 on Thu, 20 Oct 2011, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> writes
>Just FYI - To the extent that you want to enable similar
>"mesh" network solutions which rely on household Internet
>connectivity, it is important to lay some groundwork re
>the terms of the Internet service agreements for consumers
>first.  While not enforced (to my knowledge), you'll find
>that the typical home broadband term of service precludes
>anything other personal/residential use via your local LAN,
>and some go as far to preclude the use of any equipment
>which would provide sharing of network service to others.
>
>While this doesn't really prevent the informal sharing that
>occurs nearly everywhere, it makes it challenging to build
>an actual service offer on top of a mesh of home Internet
>connections.

I agree with all that, except that in the UK the home wifi sharing idea 
comes from the very telco supplying the residential connectivity (BT of 
course). http://www.btfon.com/

(The current issue is perhaps whether O2 mobile customers get access to 
the Fon network, or only the overtly public BT Openzone one. Mindful 
that O2 was once the mobile arm of BT, but sold off some time ago; 
nevertheless apparently still enjoying a certain degree of special 
relationship).
-- 
Roland Perry
____________________________________________________________
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


From joy at apc.org  Thu Oct 20 11:16:37 2011
From: joy at apc.org (Joy Liddicoat)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 04:16:37 +1300
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org> <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00f401cc8f3b$465d3de0$d317b9a0$@apc.org>

Congratulations Sala - great to see Pacific women's leadership!

Joy

 

From: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf
Of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
Sent: Friday, 21 October 2011 12:27 a.m.
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeremy Malcolm
Subject: Re: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
elections

 

Dear All,

 

Firstly this is humbling and I thank you sincerely for your confidence and
hope to serve you. I would also like to thank my comrades Songitu, Asif and
Imran, and hope that you run again next year.

 

I would also like to thank Jeremy for the nomination and Bill for seconding
it and all those that supported it. I do no intend to fill in nor try to
fill in Jeremy's shoes - they are far too big :) Jeremy as we all know has
done tremendous work and so I thank you Jeremy. I look forward to being
briefed by Jeremy and Izumi.

 

I am actually in Seoul waiting for my flight to Dubai which leaves in 3
hours.

 

Again thank you for allowing me the privilege to be your serve you.

 

Best Regards,

Sala

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator
and returning officer.

 

99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
(24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
are encouraged to re-apply next year.

 

6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.

 

In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
above" option.

 

In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
you think?

 

The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
role.

 

-- 

Dr 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 <tel:%2B60%203%207726%201599> 

Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
protect and empower consumers everywhere.
www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/> 
Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int> 

Read our email confidentiality notice
<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> . Don't print
this email unless necessary.

 





 

-- 

Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala

 

Tweeter: @SalanietaT

Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro

Cell: +679 998 2851

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/a996e738/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Thu Oct 20 11:32:32 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:32:32 -0200
Subject: [governance] Efficient Spectrum Management + Efficient Networks
 = Access ?
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiA7HqMwecyUTYRvS2+_sb=bmeXHV7TnWkK0v1kJujeZrQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiB_K5UvUf0AcYLXxpavfWOpTJAxyJ7J3=WQvs6FrRNVdA@mail.gmail.com>	<4EA027DF.6020205@cafonso.ca> <CAJwbTiA7HqMwecyUTYRvS2+_sb=bmeXHV7TnWkK0v1kJujeZrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EA03F10.8060605@cafonso.ca>

How about that? Thanks, Sala, for the useful reference.

--c.a.

On 10/20/2011 12:04 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
> And in the US this was on TV today:
> AT&T offers up spectrum, as states join DoJ lawsuit
> 
> http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=48059&id=e9381817-0593-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10
> 
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:53 AM, Carlos A. Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> wrote:
> 
>> As usual when business asks for "immediate action" on something, let us
>> be careful on this.
>>
>> Spectrum bids are won by big telcos who in many cases win these bids for
>>  a preemptive strategy -- hoarding big chunks of spectrum to block other
>> competitors, even more so where regulators are weak or biased towards
>> big business. This needs to be analyzed on a case by case basis with a
>> review of actual deployment of services and real demand, as well as the
>> focus of universal service (which in many cases is not imposed in the
>> incumbent contracts by the regulators).
>>
>> --c.a.
>>
>> On 10/20/2011 11:36 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> I was looking for something on the International Chamber of Commerce
>> website
>>> and found an Article interesting on Mobile Broadband Spectrum Shortage
>>> requires immediate action, see:
>>> http://www.iccwbo.org/policy/ebitt/index.html?id=46201 It's relevance to
>>> internet governance is that Spectrum is a factor in terms of access for
>>> consumers etc.
>>>
>>>
>>> Also an interesting article was published in Trinidad today, see an
>> article
>>> called "Not Quite An App for That Yet" by Bevil Wooding, see:
>>> http://www.guardian.co.tt/business-guardian/2011/10/20/not-quite-yet-app
>>>
>>> on Mobile Networks holding back innovation...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>
> 
> 
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From mariliamaciel at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 16:18:56 2011
From: mariliamaciel at gmail.com (Marilia Maciel)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 18:18:56 -0200
Subject: [governance] Background docs for CSTD WG upcoming meeting
Message-ID: <CACpVkK2a736xMN32289D8U-8jZPfKfUrniQ+rSi+DBVbAw9ZHQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all,

Peter Major, the new chair of the CSTD WG on IGF improvements, has provided
a good set of documents to facilitate the the work and discussions of
meeting participants.
It would be great if more people could take a look and give their inputs
about the dynamics he proposed and about the substantive aspects of the
discussion.
The main documents are:

*Structure and working method of CSTD WG on Improvements to
IGF<http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Download.asp?docid=15852&lang=1&intItemID=2068>
*
*
*
*Chairman’s draft summary of responses/recommendations to the
Questionnaire <http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Download.asp?docid=15853&lang=1&intItemID=2068>
*

Any insights are much welcome.

Best wishes,
Marília
-- 
Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade
FGV Direito Rio

Center for Technology and Society
Getulio Vargas Foundation
Rio de Janeiro - Brazil
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/61103014/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, 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


From gurstein at gmail.com  Thu Oct 20 21:28:35 2011
From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein)
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 18:28:35 -0700
Subject: [governance] Huawei banned from providing public safety network
 gear...
Message-ID: <29A5C9CCFE0A40D6938D08F9CBD3D217@acer6e40e97492>

Huawei ""will not be taking part in the building of America's interoperable
wireless emergency network for first responders due to U.S. government
national-security concerns," Commerce Department spokesman Kevin Griffis
told The Daily Beast.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/10/11/u-s-blocks-china-telecoms-b
id-to-build-wireless-network-over-spying-concerns.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111020/06c9e0c9/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, 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


From iza at anr.org  Fri Oct 21 03:24:12 2011
From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:24:12 +0900
Subject: [governance] IGC request for CSTD WG
Message-ID: <CA+YNoKhveOrUbBfLtj8+xiohK6Zfn3N-qGu3BwjH7O6srQOpAw@mail.gmail.com>

Dear list,

IGC members to CSTD WG on IGF improvement have discussed and agreed
to send the following request to the Chair asking for opening up of the WG
meeting to observers to increase transparency and openness.

It is not our "official statement", so I plan to send this shortly as
co-moderator, but just to let you all know in advance.

izumi

-------

Dear Peter,

The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS IGC)  would like to ask
you as the new Chair of the CSTD Working Group on improving IGF to
open up the meeting to non-contributing observers as it will enhance
transparency and openness of our work.

There are a number of potential observers from the civil society as well
as from other stakeholder groups, including governments,
business, and  science and technical community, who may have good
access to meetings in Geneva and would be interested in sitting inside
the meeting room.

We trust your wisdom and thank you very much for your kind consideration
in advance,

Jeremy Malcolm and Izumi Aizu,
Co-coordinators of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
(Jeremy will be replaced by our new Co-coordinator, Salanieta
Tamanikaiwaimaro shortly)
____________________________________________________________
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


From daniel at digsys.bg  Fri Oct 21 03:49:27 2011
From: daniel at digsys.bg (Daniel Kalchev)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:49:27 +0300
Subject: [governance] ICANN 42 in Dakar
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiBJJn=p41O5WV6TXHG4jQ_wuQVfThp3Yp6M2aKebe0AqA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJwbTiAyJqUPRq+27aLJkBfg1EF=5cr5=iuYa2LOr4mh9TuU1w@mail.gmail.com> <CAPcSPKV1hf2mFOBJs5Kh0y6fBAEKcU7kcriBJ8s70teHF789Cg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJwbTiBJJn=p41O5WV6TXHG4jQ_wuQVfThp3Yp6M2aKebe0AqA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <DDCBDCCB-EA61-4389-A26E-2BCC6DF71964@digsys.bg>

I will likely to arrive on 22th.

Daniel

On Oct 19, 2011, at 14:04 , Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote:

> [rofl] @ Olivier's comments. Yes it will be good to have a cup of tea together, Karim, Baudouin & Olivier just to catch up :) We can even grab some dinner on the 21st. 
> 
> Yes travelling from the Pacific is such a strain but it should be worth it.
> 
> Best,
> Sala
> 
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Baudouin Schombe <baudouin.schombe at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> 
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>  
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/4a46949a/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, 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


From f.cortiana at provincia.milano.it  Fri Oct 21 04:03:37 2011
From: f.cortiana at provincia.milano.it (Fiorello Cortiana)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:03:37 +0200
Subject: R: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com>
References: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com>
Message-ID: <95227A668FFBB141A238AE53582A8E11011E70A8@VEXNODE2.man.provincia.mi.it>

me too
 
Fiorello Cortiana

________________________________

Da: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Per conto di KovenRonald at aol.com
Inviato: giovedì 20 ottobre 2011 13.35
A: jeremy at ciroap.org; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Oggetto: Re: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator elections


Dear All --

I didn't vote because i didn't get a very clear idea who the candidates were. But I still want to be active in the IGC. I therefore think there should be a way to vote, exoressing interest in the IGC, without stating a preference for a candidate.

Rather than "none of the above," I suggest there be provision for "abstain," which casts aspersions on nobody, while showing attachment to the caucus.

With a couple of notable exceptions, voting isn't a requirement of citizenship. And even in countries where voting is required explicitly (Australia, Belgium) or implicitly (Italy), one can, after all cast a blank or spoiled ballot. 

Best regards, Rony Koven
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/42d34ca1/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, 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


From f.cortiana at provincia.milano.it  Fri Oct 21 04:17:25 2011
From: f.cortiana at provincia.milano.it (Fiorello Cortiana)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:17:25 +0200
Subject: R: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <95227A668FFBB141A238AE53582A8E11011E70A8@VEXNODE2.man.provincia.mi.it>
References: <3a53e.6c6bb92c.3bd1615a@aol.com> <95227A668FFBB141A238AE53582A8E11011E70A8@VEXNODE2.man.provincia.mi.it>
Message-ID: <95227A668FFBB141A238AE53582A8E11011E70AA@VEXNODE2.man.provincia.mi.it>

Me too
 
Fiorello Cortiana
 
 
________________________________

Da: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Per conto di KovenRonald at aol.com
Inviato: giovedì 20 ottobre 2011 13.35
A: jeremy at ciroap.org; governance at lists.cpsr.org
Oggetto: Re: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator elections


Dear All --

I didn't vote because i didn't get a very clear idea who the candidates were. But I still want to be active in the IGC. I therefore think there should be a way to vote, exoressing interest in the IGC, without stating a preference for a candidate.

Rather than "none of the above," I suggest there be provision for "abstain," which casts aspersions on nobody, while showing attachment to the caucus.

With a couple of notable exceptions, voting isn't a requirement of citizenship. And even in countries where voting is required explicitly (Australia, Belgium) or implicitly (Italy), one can, after all cast a blank or spoiled ballot. 

Best regards, Rony Koven
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/bd3eeb7d/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Fri Oct 21 04:29:40 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:29:40 +0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org> <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch> <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca>
Message-ID: <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch>

Hi Carlos

On Oct 20, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:

> OK, my tokens on this:
> 
> - It is obvious there was a shift and I am sure Brazil took into account
> our (BR ngos') insistent dialogue on the issues with them.

I'm glad to hear this.  Since you talk with the government a lot you have a better vantage point from which to read what's behind the words.  Others have to go on what the words say, and they are not crystal clear on the main point. If the notion of a new UN body that would integrate and centralize and oversee and thereby solve all problems has been abandoned, it'd be nice to hear that said in plain language that doesn't require readers to engage in hermeneutics, semiotics, deconstructionism, or related.  Then all the folks who've been concerned about this can de-clench and we can start to have a probing and useful dialogue about better ways forward.

BTW, do you know if we can assume then that there will not be a proposal going to the UNGA?
> 
> - The Tshwane Declaration shows the IBSA efforts are far broader than
> Internet-related issues, and at least BR ngos are interested in the
> whole set of themes they are dealing with, not just whether Icann's butt
> will be kicked or not.

And non-BR ngos often share those interests, so let's have a broader discussion.
> 
> - The "thrust" (whatever the meaning in this context) of the declaration
> of an intergovernmental meeting, Bill, is intergovernmental, what else
> would you expect?

As you know, there have been quite a lot of intergovernmental meetings of late that have issued declarations endorsing MS approaches to IG.  If the GAC, COE, OECD, et al can say it loud and clear, why can't IBSA?  Yes we know the Brazilian govt is friendly to MS, but we don't know if IBSA now in fact sees open global MS processes as the way to proceed on the issues with which it is concerned.  If yes, fabulous, they should say it and we will all tip our hats accordingly.  
> 
> I would insist our compas north of the Equator, and especially west of
> Greenwich :) be a bit more neutral when analyzing joint
> intergovernmental efforts from the South,

Why should anyone be neutral?  Your compas are opposed to bad ideas irrespective of where they come from, what's wrong with that?  Are bad ideas less problematic if they're from the South?

> and always remember to take a
> look at their own govs' tails first.

It's not obvious how this is relevant, but bad ideas from Northern governments, including those that may have issued their passports, have been routinely criticized by said compas since we launched this list in 2003.  In fact, these get probably 85% of the air time!

Cheers,

Bill

> 
> 
> On 10/19/2011 04:05 PM, William Drake wrote:
>> Hi Anriette
>> 
>> We just had this conversation bilaterally, but sure let's open it up...
>> 
>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:25 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Bill
>>> 
>>> I think your response is a bit hasty. There are serious gaps.. e.g. the
>>> lack of emphasis on multi-stakeholder participation pointed out by
>>> Sivasubramanian, but overall I think the section on IG shows very
>>> clearly that the IBSA government representatives took reactions at the
>>> IGF to their proposal very seriously.
>> 
>> As with many diplomatic texts, one can read it a number of ways.  I guess you read the absence of specific reference to a new UN organization to "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible" etc. as reflecting a shift.  I read the larger thrust of the text and its references to prior pronouncements etc and don't come away confident there's an agreed shift, at least not yet.  But either way, if you're right they took reactions at the IGF to their proposal very seriously, why not say that?  Why not help strengthen the IGF's position by underscoring its value and the importance of global multistakeholder dialogue on this and related matters?  That's what I referred to, the no comment on the IGF dialogue, …
>>> 
>>> This is a very different text to what had been proposed,
>> 
>> Do you mean the by the Rio recs, or something else?
>> 
>>> and clearly
>>> indicates that there will be further discussion on the September
>>> meeting's recommendations, which is what civil society organisations
>>> from the three countries requested.
>>> 
>>> Multi-stakeholder participation in the observatory is not mentioned, but
>>> it is also not excluded. My assumption is that this was an oversight,
>>> rather than a deliberate attempt to make it 'intergovernmental'.
>> 
>> We are always being told, or telling ourselves, that the lack of mention of multistakeholder participation in these things is an oversight.  Given all the heated discussions on the matter, I find that increasingly difficult to swallow.  The lack of specific reference to a UN body is revealing, but the lack of specific reference to multistakeholderism is just a case of whoops, sorry, we forgot…?
>> 
>> The thrust still feels pretty intergovernmental, as in "The Leaders...emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a key global player."  
>> 
>>> However, I think that the absence of multi-stakeholder participation as
>>> a principle is very disappointing. It should have been mentioned upfront
>>> in the section on global governance reform. There are other references
>>> to participation from stakeholders.. but that is not enough.
>>> 
>>> Human rights text is fairly good, as is the IP text.
>> 
>> Yes
>>> 
>>> Need to still read the whole document carefully.
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>> http://www.pravasitoday.com/read-tshwane-declaration-at-5th-ibsa-summit
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> Bill
>>> 
>>> On 19/10/11 18:24, William Drake wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on
>>>>> Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September
>>>>> 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action. 
>>>> 
>>>> The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions to those
>>>> recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum convened in Nairobi
>>>> on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to pretend it didn't happen.
>>>> 
>>>>> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area
>>>>> that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this
>>>>> context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
>>>>> Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to
>>>>> monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular
>>>>> updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
>>>> 
>>>> The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA rather
>>>> than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder participation in the
>>>> Observatory is not needed.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>> www.apc.org
>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>> south africa
>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

____________________________________________________________
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


From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 04:59:44 2011
From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 04:59:44 -0400
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
	<CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAC0JwGO7oqFg=RwtUq6Vm0ygD1tVZYHkLiCHQc57M7x5WYudAw@mail.gmail.com>

Wow! Huge Big up to the Small Islands!!!

Congrats Sala ... Best wishes for great success during your term.

And many kudos to Jeremy for all of his work and dedication over the
last period.

He has indeed left a tangible legacy.

Thanks Jeremy.

Sincerely,

Tracy

On 10/20/11, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Firstly this is humbling and I thank you sincerely for your confidence and
> hope to serve you. I would also like to thank my comrades Songitu, Asif and
> Imran, and hope that you run again next year.
>
> I would also like to thank Jeremy for the nomination and Bill for seconding
> it and all those that supported it. I do no intend to fill in nor try to
> fill in Jeremy's shoes - they are far too big :) Jeremy as we all know has
> done tremendous work and so I thank you Jeremy. I look forward to being
> briefed by Jeremy and Izumi.
>
> I am actually in Seoul waiting for my flight to Dubai which leaves in 3
> hours.
>
> Again thank you for allowing me the privilege to be your serve you.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sala
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
>> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
>> coordinator and returning officer.
>>
>> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
>> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
>> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
>> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
>> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>>
>> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
>> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were
>> not
>> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>>
>> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
>> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
>> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
>> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
>> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines
>> membership
>> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
>> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
>> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by
>> my
>> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of
>> the
>> above" option.
>>
>> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in
>> my
>> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
>> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
>> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that
>> such
>> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
>> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate
>> of
>> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
>> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this
>> year
>> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
>> you think?
>>
>> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
>> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her
>> new
>> role.
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Dr 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
>>
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
>> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
>> and
>> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
>> organisations
>> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to
>> help
>> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>> *www.consumersinternational.org*
>> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality
>> notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
____________________________________________________________
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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Fri Oct 21 05:02:47 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:02:47 +0200
Subject: [governance] ITU follies
Message-ID: <CAE54796-6727-4404-93BC-F8F0706713C5@uzh.ch>

Kieren has the low down on the two week ITU Council meeting that concludes today.

Of particular note, the Dedicated Group on international Internet-related public policy issues will become a full working group with a broad mandate and will remain strictly intergovernmental with its docs restricted to ITU members.  However, it's supposed to hold open consultations.  So we may be invited to provide input, just not to know what they're actually doing.

And Saudi Arabia's campaigning for a "forum" in 2013 on Internet governance.

 http://news.dot-nxt.com/2011/10/18/itu-council-meeting-summary

Bill





***************************************************
William J. Drake
International Fellow
Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ
University of Zurich, Switzerland
william.drake at uzh.ch
www.mediachange.ch/people/william-j-drake
www.williamdrake.org
****************************************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/43b5bd53/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, 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


From anriette at apc.org  Fri Oct 21 05:08:11 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:08:11 +0200
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <CAHj_20jTM4R72n75g9vz6PvpYa0DLXGd4HPqou+d1kJVohrYOQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org> <CAHj_20jTM4R72n75g9vz6PvpYa0DLXGd4HPqou+d1kJVohrYOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EA1367B.5010209@apc.org>


Congratulations Sala!

Anriette
____________________________________________________________
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


From isolatedn at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 05:10:51 2011
From: isolatedn at gmail.com (Sivasubramanian M)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:40:51 +0530
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <CAHyAo0GvySuju+yX81CRKOrZcW2T057BHnf_3m41N=-RFgjhaw@mail.gmail.com>

Congratulations Sala. :)


Sivasubramanian M




On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
> coordinator and returning officer.
>
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership
> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my
> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the
> above" option.
>
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such
> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of
> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year
> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
> you think?
>
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
>
> --
>
> *Dr 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
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> *www.consumersinternational.org*
> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>
> Read our email confidentiality notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/b8bb54f6/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, 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


From philippe.blanchard at me.com  Fri Oct 21 05:32:39 2011
From: philippe.blanchard at me.com (Philippe Blanchard)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:32:39 +0200
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To:  <CAC0JwGO7oqFg=RwtUq6Vm0ygD1tVZYHkLiCHQc57M7x5WYudAw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
 <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAC0JwGO7oqFg=RwtUq6Vm0ygD1tVZYHkLiCHQc57M7x5WYudAw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <14537F10-690A-4762-B31E-7A8C68882657@me.com>

Congratulations to Sala but also to all the list participants for their commitment in implementing democracy.
And many thanks to Jeremy who made it all possible.

Philippe

On 10/20/11, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> Firstly this is humbling and I thank you sincerely for your confidence and
> hope to serve you. I would also like to thank my comrades Songitu, Asif and
> Imran, and hope that you run again next year.
> 
> I would also like to thank Jeremy for the nomination and Bill for seconding
> it and all those that supported it. I do no intend to fill in nor try to
> fill in Jeremy's shoes - they are far too big :) Jeremy as we all know has
> done tremendous work and so I thank you Jeremy. I look forward to being
> briefed by Jeremy and Izumi.
> 
> I am actually in Seoul waiting for my flight to Dubai which leaves in 3
> hours.
> 
> Again thank you for allowing me the privilege to be your serve you.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Sala
> 
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> 
>> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
>> coordinator and returning officer.
>> 
>> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
>> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
>> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
>> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
>> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>> 
>> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
>> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were
>> not
>> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>> 
>> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
>> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
>> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
>> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
>> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines
>> membership
>> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
>> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
>> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by
>> my
>> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of
>> the
>> above" option.
>> 
>> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in
>> my
>> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
>> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
>> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that
>> such
>> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
>> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate
>> of
>> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
>> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this
>> year
>> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
>> you think?
>> 
>> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
>> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her
>> new
>> role.
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> *Dr 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
>> 
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
>> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
>> and
>> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
>> organisations
>> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to
>> help
>> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>> *www.consumersinternational.org*
>> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>> 
>> Read our email confidentiality
>> notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
> 
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


____________________________________________________________
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


From ian.peter at ianpeter.com  Fri Oct 21 05:33:49 2011
From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:33:49 +1100
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <CAHyAo0GvySuju+yX81CRKOrZcW2T057BHnf_3m41N=-RFgjhaw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAC787AD.1D846%ian.peter@ianpeter.com>

Congratulations Sala, and many thanks to Jeremy who has done a fantastic job
at a crucial time.





From: Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com>
Reply-To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Sivasubramanian M
<isolatedn at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 14:40:51 +0530
To: <governance at lists.cpsr.org>, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org>
Subject: Re: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
elections

Congratulations Sala. :)


Sivasubramanian M




On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator
> and returning officer.
> 
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of the
> IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who are
> encouraged to re-apply next year.
> 
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not
> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
> 
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail of
> that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a couple
> of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above" option.  The
> charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership for the
> purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in the last
> election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was unambiguously
> constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my experience of
> other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the above" option.
> 
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my
> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on the
> table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to coordinate
> now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such an amendment
> would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on all of us during
> the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of candidates at least
> one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid misunderstanding, I am
> not imputing to those who voted informally this year that they were unhappy
> with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do you think?
> 
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new
> role.
> 
> -- 
> 
> Dr 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
> 
> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that,
> working together with its members, serves as the only independent and
> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations
> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help
> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
> www.consumersinternational.org <http://www.consumersinternational.org/>
> Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>
> 
> Read our email confidentiality notice
> <http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality> . 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, 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


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/57b4ba50/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, 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


From williams.deirdre at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 05:34:34 2011
From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 05:34:34 -0400
Subject: [governance] IGC request for CSTD WG
In-Reply-To: <CA+YNoKhveOrUbBfLtj8+xiohK6Zfn3N-qGu3BwjH7O6srQOpAw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+YNoKhveOrUbBfLtj8+xiohK6Zfn3N-qGu3BwjH7O6srQOpAw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMz5XN6Uo61-izBTbRBY+Uy=M_FoPFxYbEnPoyP=sAoJ2QWSsg@mail.gmail.com>

Good idea :-)

On 21 October 2011 03:24, Izumi AIZU <iza at anr.org> wrote:

> Dear list,
>
> IGC members to CSTD WG on IGF improvement have discussed and agreed
> to send the following request to the Chair asking for opening up of the WG
> meeting to observers to increase transparency and openness.
>
> It is not our "official statement", so I plan to send this shortly as
> co-moderator, but just to let you all know in advance.
>
> izumi
>
> -------
>
> Dear Peter,
>
> The Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus (CS IGC)  would like to ask
> you as the new Chair of the CSTD Working Group on improving IGF to
> open up the meeting to non-contributing observers as it will enhance
> transparency and openness of our work.
>
> There are a number of potential observers from the civil society as well
> as from other stakeholder groups, including governments,
> business, and  science and technical community, who may have good
> access to meetings in Geneva and would be interested in sitting inside
> the meeting room.
>
> We trust your wisdom and thank you very much for your kind consideration
> in advance,
>
> Jeremy Malcolm and Izumi Aizu,
> Co-coordinators of the Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus
> (Jeremy will be replaced by our new Co-coordinator, Salanieta
> Tamanikaiwaimaro shortly)
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/7647cc05/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, 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


From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de  Fri Oct 21 05:30:21 2011
From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:30:21 +0200
Subject: AW: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
 <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAC0JwGO7oqFg=RwtUq6Vm0ygD1tVZYHkLiCHQc57M7x5WYudAw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8D2C648@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de>

Hi Sala
 
the Summer School on Internet Governance (SSIG) is very proud that another "Meissen Fellow" has moved into an Internet Governance leadership position. Congratulations and best wishes. 
 
Wolfgang

________________________________

Von: governance at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google
Gesendet: Fr 21.10.2011 10:59
An: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro; Jeremy Malcolm
Betreff: Re: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator elections



Wow! Huge Big up to the Small Islands!!!

Congrats Sala ... Best wishes for great success during your term.

And many kudos to Jeremy for all of his work and dedication over the
last period.

He has indeed left a tangible legacy.

Thanks Jeremy.

Sincerely,

Tracy

On 10/20/11, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro
<salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> Firstly this is humbling and I thank you sincerely for your confidence and
> hope to serve you. I would also like to thank my comrades Songitu, Asif and
> Imran, and hope that you run again next year.
>
> I would also like to thank Jeremy for the nomination and Bill for seconding
> it and all those that supported it. I do no intend to fill in nor try to
> fill in Jeremy's shoes - they are far too big :) Jeremy as we all know has
> done tremendous work and so I thank you Jeremy. I look forward to being
> briefed by Jeremy and Izumi.
>
> I am actually in Seoul waiting for my flight to Dubai which leaves in 3
> hours.
>
> Again thank you for allowing me the privilege to be your serve you.
>
> Best Regards,
> Sala
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:
>
>> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing
>> coordinator and returning officer.
>>
>> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26
>> (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%)
>> for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of
>> the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who
>> are encouraged to re-apply next year.
>>
>> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already
>> voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were
>> not
>> given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
>>
>> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their
>> eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail
>> of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a
>> couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above"
>> option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines
>> membership
>> for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in
>> the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was
>> unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by
>> my
>> experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of
>> the
>> above" option.
>>
>> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in
>> my
>> view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on
>> the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to
>> coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that
>> such
>> an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on
>> all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate
>> of
>> candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid
>> misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this
>> year
>> that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do
>> you think?
>>
>> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably
>> within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her
>> new
>> role.
>>
>> --
>>
>> *Dr 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
>>
>> Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups
>> that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent
>> and
>> authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member
>> organisations
>> in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to
>> help
>> protect and empower consumers everywhere.
>> *www.consumersinternational.org*
>> *Twitter @ConsumersInt <http://twitter.com/Consumers_Int>*
>>
>> Read our email confidentiality
>> notice<http://www.consumersinternational.org/email-confidentiality>.
>> Don't print this email unless necessary.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
>
> Tweeter: @SalanietaT
> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro
> Cell: +679 998 2851
>
____________________________________________________________
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



____________________________________________________________
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


From correia.rui at gmail.com  Fri Oct 21 05:53:14 2011
From: correia.rui at gmail.com (Rui Correia)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:53:14 +0100
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com>
Message-ID: <CACfJzeuSi=i780Jwai=rhDVVdw8OR9izJ0rhA+m6A087vKVagA@mail.gmail.com>

Dear All

I am a bit confused as to the use of the word "declaration" here. Is the
word being used liberally? I was not there and the IBSA site is not much
help.

Let's be clear from the outset - I am not criticising the document, I am
merely querying why it is being referred to as a declaration.The point I am
making, is not about semantics, but rather about whether one might not risk
putting too much importance on a document that was primarily meant to be a
record of events.

The document looks like an internal account of what transpired during the
meeting - like a memo or minutes on the discussion of agenda items.

It is written in the third person, so can it be taken to equate a
declaration issued in the names of the three countries/ governments/ heads
of state or government? Where is the "We" that indicates that whatever
follows is indeed the will of the those that undersign it and is taken to
mean that those who do so bind themselves to it?

It is also written in the past tense, enumerating a whole list of
"reiterated", "reaffirmed", "acknowledged", etc. It is about 80% inward
looking, about what IBSA mechanisms have done and very little about what is
commits itself to doing for society.

Be it as it may that is is written in this format, who write it? Why is the
author not identified, why is the due protocol for such a document not
followed, according it the status of a declaration by signing it off with a
mention of date and place.

So, to recap, is this a declaration?

Best regards,

Rui



2011/10/19 Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org>

> Here's the relevant bit from the Tshwane Declaration.
>
> # Internet Governance
> 52. The Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to working together towards a
> people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and
> their agreement to continue to coordinate positions for the World Summit on
> Information Society (WSIS) follow-up mechanisms, as well as in the other
> fora and organizations related to the Information Society and Information
> and Communication Technologies (ICTs).
> 53. The Leaders expressed their satisfaction with the ongoing work in this
> arena; recognized the role of the Internet as a catalyst for economic and
> social progress; and emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a
> key global player. The leaders reaffirmed the IBSA framework agreement for
> Cooperation on the Information Society adopted on September 13, 2006 and
> recalled the commitments made in the Geneva Declaration of Principles and
> the Tunis Agenda with regard to Enhanced Cooperation.
> 54. The Leaders highlighted the importance of building a wide political
> coalition at the international level for making the global internet
> governance regime as multilateral, democratic and transparent as provided by
> the WSIS.
>
> In this context, they reiterated the urgent need to operationalise the
> process of ‘Enhanced Cooperation’ mandated by the Tunis Agenda and recalled,
> with satisfaction, the fruitful coordination amongst IBSA countries in the
> deliberations on ‘Enhanced Cooperation’ in the UN Commission on Science and
> Technology for Development (CSTD) and in the UN Secretary-General’s Open
> Consultations held in December 2010. The leaders took note of the
> recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on Global Internet Governance convened
> in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake
> necessary follow-up action.
> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area that
> requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this context, it
> recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet Governance and Development
> Observatory that should be tasked to monitor developments on global Internet
> Governance and provide regular updates and analyses from the perspective of
> developing countries.
> --
> Pranesh Prakash
> Programme Manager
> Centre for Internet and Society
> T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org
>
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
_________________________
Mobile Number in Namibia +264 81 445 1308
Número de Telemóvel na Namíbia +264 81 445 1308

I am away from Johannesburg - you cannot contact me on my South African
numbers
Estou fora de Joanesburgo - não poderá entrar em contacto comigo através dos
meus números sul-africanos

Rui Correia
Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Consultant
Angola Liaison Consultant

_______________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/1ce78ecc/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, 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


From anriette at apc.org  Fri Oct 21 06:33:57 2011
From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:33:57 +0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org> <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch> <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca> <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4EA14A95.4020404@apc.org>

Dear Bill and all

I share Carlos Afonso's responses to this. A few more thoughts in
response to Bill.

On 21/10/11 10:29, William Drake wrote:
> Hi Carlos
> 
> On Oct 20, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> 
>> OK, my tokens on this:
>> 
>> - It is obvious there was a shift and I am sure Brazil took into
>> account our (BR ngos') insistent dialogue on the issues with them.
> 
> I'm glad to hear this.  Since you talk with the government a lot you
> have a better vantage point from which to read what's behind the
> words.  Others have to go on what the words say, and they are not
> crystal clear on the main point. If the notion of a new UN body that
> would integrate and centralize and oversee and thereby solve all
> problems has been abandoned, it'd be nice to hear that said in plain
> language that doesn't require readers to engage in hermeneutics,
> semiotics, deconstructionism, or related.  Then all the folks who've
> been concerned about this can de-clench and we can start to have a
> probing and useful dialogue about better ways forward.

There was definitely a substantial shift. I don't think it matters that
IGF was not named, or giving any kind of attribution.  It would be
nice.. but I suspect there is still a concern among one or all of those
governments about giving recognition to the IGF being used in
intergovernmental negotiations as 'giving up on any further efforts
towards enhanced cooperation'.

This unfortunate trade off/or lack of it is the result of some
governments and non-governmental actors insisting that 'enhanced
cooperation is already happening through the IGF' (or something along
those lines).

It is a real pity.. and I did propose at the IBSA meeting in Rio that
this kind of 'trading' stops... but I can see why the IBSA governments
are holding on to it.. even if I don't agree.

> BTW, do you know if we can assume then that there will not be a
> proposal going to the UNGA?

That is a really interesting question.  I would not rule it out.. but I
think it is less likely.

>> - The Tshwane Declaration shows the IBSA efforts are far broader
>> than Internet-related issues, and at least BR ngos are interested
>> in the whole set of themes they are dealing with, not just whether
>> Icann's butt will be kicked or not.
> 
> And non-BR ngos often share those interests, so let's have a broader
> discussion.

Yes.. I think some of the IBSA statement positions on e.g. IPR are
shared by many NGOs outside of the IBSA region.  One of the reasons that
IBSA governments have a progressive stance in this regard is because of
many years of collaboration between NGOs in the south and NGOs in the north.

My worry is that only the Brazilian government (among the three) are
consistently applying progressive principles in domestic policy as well
as in global forums. I don't know that much about Indian policy. but I
do know that in South Africa much needed national copyright reform is
not happening.

>> - The "thrust" (whatever the meaning in this context) of the
>> declaration of an intergovernmental meeting, Bill, is
>> intergovernmental, what else would you expect?
> 
> As you know, there have been quite a lot of intergovernmental
> meetings of late that have issued declarations endorsing MS
> approaches to IG.  If the GAC, COE, OECD, et al can say it loud and
> clear, why can't IBSA?  Yes we know the Brazilian govt is friendly to
> MS, but we don't know if IBSA now in fact sees open global MS
> processes as the way to proceed on the issues with which it is
> concerned.  If yes, fabulous, they should say it and we will all tip
> our hats accordingly.

I agree that they should say it. I suspect that they don't yet have a
unified position/and or common understanding of what they mean by
'multi-stakeholder participation'. They are all three broadly in
support.. but degree and consistency of implementation varies
enormously. In South Africa this is a constant site of struggle with
civil society and activists (e.g. the Right to Know coalition)
constantly having to put pressure on government to consult and maintain
transparency. MS participation is not yet institutionalised, other than
in the traditional 'labour/market/government' form.

On the other hand...while saying it loud and clear as European and
Western govs are doing is not enough. It needs to really work.. and MS
participation still has a long way to go to really change power
configurations.  This is why Wolfgang et al's recent issue of MIND is
interesting and important.. it deepens the thinking on this.
>> 
>> I would insist our compas north of the Equator, and especially west
>> of Greenwich :) be a bit more neutral when analyzing joint 
>> intergovernmental efforts from the South,
> 
> Why should anyone be neutral?  Your compas are opposed to bad ideas
> irrespective of where they come from, what's wrong with that?  Are
> bad ideas less problematic if they're from the South?

Hmmm :)  I think our views of government initiatives are often informed
by our histories and experiences. Bad ideas can be in the eyes of the
beholder.

I agree with you Bill, that we should not be neutral in responding to
government actions that could infringe on rights/freedoms or that can
create more barriers.. but I do agree with Carlos that there is a
tendency (more so among the technical community than among civil
society) to assume that developing country intergovernmental efforts are
more sinister than intergovernmental efforts from the traditional
'western democracies'. (Not saying you are guilty of this Bill!)

The whole IGF improvement debate is an example of this.

There are also often knee jerk reactions from civil society in the
'global south'.  We need to be consistently critical and careful.

Cheers

Anriette


>> and always remember to take a look at their own govs' tails first.
> 
> It's not obvious how this is relevant, but bad ideas from Northern
> governments, including those that may have issued their passports,
> have been routinely criticized by said compas since we launched this
> list in 2003.  In fact, these get probably 85% of the air time!
> 

> Cheers,
> 
> Bill
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 10/19/2011 04:05 PM, William Drake wrote:
>>> Hi Anriette
>>> 
>>> We just had this conversation bilaterally, but sure let's open it
>>> up...
>>> 
>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:25 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Bill
>>>> 
>>>> I think your response is a bit hasty. There are serious gaps..
>>>> e.g. the lack of emphasis on multi-stakeholder participation
>>>> pointed out by Sivasubramanian, but overall I think the section
>>>> on IG shows very clearly that the IBSA government
>>>> representatives took reactions at the IGF to their proposal
>>>> very seriously.
>>> 
>>> As with many diplomatic texts, one can read it a number of ways.
>>> I guess you read the absence of specific reference to a new UN
>>> organization to "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible"
>>> etc. as reflecting a shift.  I read the larger thrust of the text
>>> and its references to prior pronouncements etc and don't come
>>> away confident there's an agreed shift, at least not yet.  But
>>> either way, if you're right they took reactions at the IGF to
>>> their proposal very seriously, why not say that?  Why not help
>>> strengthen the IGF's position by underscoring its value and the
>>> importance of global multistakeholder dialogue on this and
>>> related matters?  That's what I referred to, the no comment on
>>> the IGF dialogue, …
>>>> 
>>>> This is a very different text to what had been proposed,
>>> 
>>> Do you mean the by the Rio recs, or something else?
>>> 
>>>> and clearly indicates that there will be further discussion on
>>>> the September meeting's recommendations, which is what civil
>>>> society organisations from the three countries requested.
>>>> 
>>>> Multi-stakeholder participation in the observatory is not
>>>> mentioned, but it is also not excluded. My assumption is that
>>>> this was an oversight, rather than a deliberate attempt to make
>>>> it 'intergovernmental'.
>>> 
>>> We are always being told, or telling ourselves, that the lack of
>>> mention of multistakeholder participation in these things is an
>>> oversight.  Given all the heated discussions on the matter, I
>>> find that increasingly difficult to swallow.  The lack of
>>> specific reference to a UN body is revealing, but the lack of
>>> specific reference to multistakeholderism is just a case of
>>> whoops, sorry, we forgot…?
>>> 
>>> The thrust still feels pretty intergovernmental, as in "The
>>> Leaders...emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a
>>> key global player."
>>> 
>>>> However, I think that the absence of multi-stakeholder
>>>> participation as a principle is very disappointing. It should
>>>> have been mentioned upfront in the section on global governance
>>>> reform. There are other references to participation from
>>>> stakeholders.. but that is not enough.
>>>> 
>>>> Human rights text is fairly good, as is the IP text.
>>> 
>>> Yes
>>>> 
>>>> Need to still read the whole document carefully.
>>> 
>>> Yes
>>> 
>>> http://www.pravasitoday.com/read-tshwane-declaration-at-5th-ibsa-summit
>>>
>>>
>>> 
Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Bill
>>>> 
>>>> On 19/10/11 18:24, William Drake wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA
>>>>>> Workshop on Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de
>>>>>> Janeiro on 1-2 September 2011 and resolved to jointly
>>>>>> undertake necessary follow-up action.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions
>>>>> to those recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum
>>>>> convened in Nairobi on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to
>>>>> pretend it didn't happen.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key
>>>>>> strategic area that requires close collaboration and
>>>>>> concrete action. In this context, it recommended the
>>>>>> establishment of an IBSA Internet Governance and
>>>>>> Development Observatory that should be tasked to monitor
>>>>>> developments on global Internet Governance and provide
>>>>>> regular updates and analyses from the perspective of
>>>>>> developing countries.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA
>>>>> rather than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder
>>>>> participation in the Observatory is not needed.
>>>> 
>>>> -- ------------------------------------------------------ 
>>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org executive director,
>>>> association for progressive communications www.apc.org po box
>>>> 29755, melville 2109 south africa tel/fax +27 11 726 1692 
>>>> ____________________________________________________________ 
>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________ 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
>> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________ 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
> 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------
anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
executive director, association for progressive communications
www.apc.org
po box 29755, melville 2109
south africa
tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
____________________________________________________________
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


From naveedpta at hotmail.com  Fri Oct 21 07:30:16 2011
From: naveedpta at hotmail.com (Naveed haq)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:30:16 +0000
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To:  <CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>,<CAJwbTiARZj6zs0tyiMx-5Y7S_kHeFLpU2WsahxTn-VBauH2HWg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <COL122-W17930309E3155D70E76138B7E80@phx.gbl>


Dear Sala,

Big Congrats on the selection. Wish you all the best while carrying out your work under this challenging and exciting position. 

Best Regards,

Naveed-ul-Haq 


Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 23:26:52 +1200
From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; jeremy at ciroap.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator elections

Dear All,
Firstly this is humbling and I thank you sincerely for your confidence and hope to serve you. I would also like to thank my comrades Songitu, Asif and Imran, and hope that you run again next year.

I would also like to thank Jeremy for the nomination and Bill for seconding it and all those that supported it. I do no intend to fill in nor try to fill in Jeremy's shoes - they are far too big :) Jeremy as we all know has done tremendous work and so I thank you Jeremy. I look forward to being briefed by Jeremy and Izumi.

I am actually in Seoul waiting for my flight to Dubai which leaves in 3 hours.
Again thank you for allowing me the privilege to be your serve you.
Best Regards,
Sala

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 11:18 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator and returning officer.
99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26 (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%) for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who are encouraged to re-apply next year.

6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.

In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above" option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the above" option.

In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do you think?

The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new role.

-- 
Dr 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
Consumers International (CI) is the world federation of consumer groups that, working together with its members, serves as the only independent and authoritative global voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we are building a powerful international movement to help protect and empower consumers everywhere.

www.consumersinternational.org
Twitter @ConsumersInt

Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary.





-- 
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala
Tweeter: @SalanietaTSkype:Salanieta.TamanikaiwaimaroCell: +679 998 2851
 


 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/9f688405/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, 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


From william.drake at uzh.ch  Fri Oct 21 07:32:59 2011
From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 13:32:59 +0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <4EA14A95.4020404@apc.org>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org> <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch> <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca> <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch> <4EA14A95.4020404@apc.org>
Message-ID: <3B9704FA-0B65-4398-B99A-3B5561468E7C@uzh.ch>

Hi Anriette

I agree with all your points, but one in particular merits consideration.

On Oct 21, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:

> I agree with you Bill, that we should not be neutral in responding to
> government actions that could infringe on rights/freedoms or that can
> create more barriers.. but I do agree with Carlos that there is a
> tendency (more so among the technical community than among civil
> society) to assume that developing country intergovernmental efforts are
> more sinister than intergovernmental efforts from the traditional
> 'western democracies'. (Not saying you are guilty of this Bill!)
> 
> The whole IGF improvement debate is an example of this.

This is a barrier I wish we could somehow overcome.  As long as developing country intergovernmental efforts on EC and in the ITU appear to have intergovernmental control as their end game and the IGF is getting tactically linked to this as you noted, one imagines the TC, business, and a lot of governments will remain wedded to the fear that an IGF that does more than meet and chat once a year would necessarily get leveraged to advance that agenda.  And CS proponents of more intensive, structured and "outcome" oriented dialogues will remain isolated and frustrated.  If intergovernmental control could be taken off the table, at least outside the ITU, that might help to make "IGF improvements" a less divisive topic.  So again, if indeed IBSA has shifted, it'd be great for them to say so.  And for more governments beyond Brazil and a distinct minority of other G77 to demonstrate that they take the IGF process seriously and will engage even if it doesn't offer a path to intergovernmental control.

Too much to hope for?

Bill

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/f8bf8c19/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, 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


From parminder at itforchange.net  Fri Oct 21 08:07:11 2011
From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 17:37:11 +0530
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <3483B830-C6BA-4D67-8327-9C59CB52BCC7@uzh.ch> <4E9F0812.9000104@apc.org> <97790962-6914-4C52-959E-18C163B8488F@uzh.ch> <4EA0132B.4060708@cafonso.ca> <999A64B5-B15D-49A2-9A9B-1322BA103DE3@uzh.ch>
Message-ID: <4EA1606F.9070106@itforchange.net>

Hi All

Let me join the party too :) . A lot of things that need response on the 
IBSA's Rio meeting and the what happened at the IGF vis a vis it, and 
now the Tshwane declaration, but let me just join in where we are at 
present in the discussion.

On Friday 21 October 2011 01:59 PM, William Drake wrote:
> Snip
> I'm glad to hear this.  Since you talk with the government a lot you have a better vantage point from which to read what's behind the words.  Others have to go on what the words say, and they are not crystal clear on the main point. If the notion of a new UN body that would integrate and centralize and oversee and thereby solve all problems has been abandoned, it'd be nice to hear that said in plain language that doesn't require readers to engage in hermeneutics, semiotics, deconstructionism, or related.  Then all the folks who've been concerned about this can de-clench and we can start to have a probing and useful dialogue about better ways forward.
>    

My clear impression is that there is no desire among IBSA countries to 
'integrate and centralise' (this later term is Bill's invention) 
technical functions of the Internet though the term 'integrate' did 
unfortunately (and inadvertently) get used in the Rio recs. The people 
in governments I met seem to agree that they did not mean the way it got 
read, and meant something closer to 'coordinate'. At the very basic 
level, what the IBSA governments seem to be asking for is to shift the 
current oversight functions from the US gov to a more democratic body. 
This has been a consistent position of developing countries for a long 
time, and the Tunis Agenda also  recognises this as a clear problem. And 
yes, there are concerns about how legitimate public policy concerns  may 
actually be communicated to many bodies with significant Internet 
related technical functions. I saw many countries other than IBSA very 
vocally state such concerns at the IGF, for instance those from the EU.  
I saw complete openness among the IBSA reps I spoke to on looking at 
different possible options of how to address these concerns, and look at 
different possible models to channel public policy concerns into the 
work of technical bodies. However, first of all, they see the need for a 
globally democratic platform where these concerns can be discussed and 
articulated clearly, which they want the proposed 'new body' to, inter 
alia, be doing.

So, while we are criticising the proposal from other, often imagined, 
angles, it may be useful to clearly address these known concerns of 
developing countries. People (or countires) mostly would hear you more 
if they see you take on board and show willingness to discuss their 
'main' concerns as well.

> BTW, do you know if we can assume then that there will not be a proposal going to the UNGA?
>    
I am not sure IBSA will make any such proposal, though I hope that they 
and others do come up with some clear proposals when the Gen Assembly 
specifically takes up the issue of 'enhanced cooperation' this year. It 
will be rather strange for developing countries to have fought hard six 
years ago for that 'place holder' of 'enhanced cooperation' in Tunis 
agenda for new globally democratic institutional developments in the IG 
arena , and having regularly asked for progress on this issues since, to 
say, when the GA actually formally takes the issue up, that we never 
knew what we were talking about.

> Snip
> As you know, there have been quite a lot of intergovernmental meetings of late that have issued declarations endorsing MS approaches to IG.  If the GAC, COE, OECD, et al can say it loud and clear, why can't IBSA?  Yes we know the Brazilian govt is friendly to MS, but we don't know if IBSA now in fact sees open global MS processes as the way to proceed on the issues with which it is concerned.  If yes, fabulous, they should say it and we will all tip our hats accordingly.
>    
Yes, multistakeholderism should have been there. Incidentally, it was 
there in the Rio recommendations (and no one tipped their hats :) ). 
Maybe IBSA countries simply got too disappointed :)
> Why should anyone be neutral?  Your compas are opposed to bad ideas irrespective of where they come from, what's wrong with that?
Alas, if it only were so! For instance, to use my pet refrain now a 
days, if OECD's inter-governmental internet policy making processes were 
subject to same criticism, nay ridicule and disdain, to which the barest 
mention of a triggering proposal from IBSA gets. Just because they 
wanted to invite all the 'evil minded' developing country governments 
too to the party of global Internet related policy making. Before we 
dont become neutral, maybe we have to become a little neutral so that we 
first puts thing on the same starting line or near about.

parminder

> It's not obvious how this is relevant, but bad ideas from Northern governments, including those that may have issued their passports, have been routinely criticized by said compas since we launched this list in 2003.  In fact, these get probably 85% of the air time!
>    

> Cheers,
>
> Bill
>
>    
>>
>> On 10/19/2011 04:05 PM, William Drake wrote:
>>      
>>> Hi Anriette
>>>
>>> We just had this conversation bilaterally, but sure let's open it up...
>>>
>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 7:25 PM, Anriette Esterhuysen wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Hi Bill
>>>>
>>>> I think your response is a bit hasty. There are serious gaps.. e.g. the
>>>> lack of emphasis on multi-stakeholder participation pointed out by
>>>> Sivasubramanian, but overall I think the section on IG shows very
>>>> clearly that the IBSA government representatives took reactions at the
>>>> IGF to their proposal very seriously.
>>>>          
>>> As with many diplomatic texts, one can read it a number of ways.  I guess you read the absence of specific reference to a new UN organization to "integrate and oversee the bodies responsible" etc. as reflecting a shift.  I read the larger thrust of the text and its references to prior pronouncements etc and don't come away confident there's an agreed shift, at least not yet.  But either way, if you're right they took reactions at the IGF to their proposal very seriously, why not say that?  Why not help strengthen the IGF's position by underscoring its value and the importance of global multistakeholder dialogue on this and related matters?  That's what I referred to, the no comment on the IGF dialogue, …
>>>        
>>>> This is a very different text to what had been proposed,
>>>>          
>>> Do you mean the by the Rio recs, or something else?
>>>
>>>        
>>>> and clearly
>>>> indicates that there will be further discussion on the September
>>>> meeting's recommendations, which is what civil society organisations
>>>> from the three countries requested.
>>>>
>>>> Multi-stakeholder participation in the observatory is not mentioned, but
>>>> it is also not excluded. My assumption is that this was an oversight,
>>>> rather than a deliberate attempt to make it 'intergovernmental'.
>>>>          
>>> We are always being told, or telling ourselves, that the lack of mention of multistakeholder participation in these things is an oversight.  Given all the heated discussions on the matter, I find that increasingly difficult to swallow.  The lack of specific reference to a UN body is revealing, but the lack of specific reference to multistakeholderism is just a case of whoops, sorry, we forgot…?
>>>
>>> The thrust still feels pretty intergovernmental, as in "The Leaders...emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a key global player."
>>>
>>>        
>>>> However, I think that the absence of multi-stakeholder participation as
>>>> a principle is very disappointing. It should have been mentioned upfront
>>>> in the section on global governance reform. There are other references
>>>> to participation from stakeholders.. but that is not enough.
>>>>
>>>> Human rights text is fairly good, as is the IP text.
>>>>          
>>> Yes
>>>        
>>>> Need to still read the whole document carefully.
>>>>          
>>> Yes
>>>
>>> http://www.pravasitoday.com/read-tshwane-declaration-at-5th-ibsa-summit
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>        
>>>> On 19/10/11 18:24, William Drake wrote:
>>>>          
>>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 19, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Pranesh Prakash wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>>>> The leaders took note of the recommendations of the IBSA Workshop on
>>>>>> Global Internet Governance convened in Rio de Janeiro on 1-2 September
>>>>>> 2011 and resolved to jointly undertake necessary follow-up action.
>>>>>>              
>>>>> The leaders took no note of the global community's reactions to those
>>>>> recommendations during the Internet Governance Forum convened in Nairobi
>>>>> on 27-30 September 2011 and resolved to pretend it didn't happen.
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>>>> 55. The Leaders emphasized Internet Governance as a key strategic area
>>>>>> that requires close collaboration and concrete action. In this
>>>>>> context, it recommended the establishment of an IBSA Internet
>>>>>> Governance and Development Observatory that should be tasked to
>>>>>> monitor developments on global Internet Governance and provide regular
>>>>>> updates and analyses from the perspective of developing countries.
>>>>>>              
>>>>> The leaders agreed that their initiative is really about IBSA rather
>>>>> than about the Internet, so global multistakeholder participation in the
>>>>> Observatory is not needed.
>>>>>            
>>>> -- 
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------
>>>> anriette esterhuysen anriette at apc.org
>>>> executive director, association for progressive communications
>>>> www.apc.org
>>>> po box 29755, melville 2109
>>>> south africa
>>>> tel/fax +27 11 726 1692
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>
>>>        
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>      
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
>    

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20111021/46de9fa9/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, 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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Fri Oct 21 08:25:03 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:25:03 -0200
Subject: [governance] Announcing the results of the 2012 IGC coordinator
 elections
In-Reply-To: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
References: <ABA3F02A-C8F5-4ED2-96C6-016C7F5B9D2E@ciroap.org>
Message-ID: <4EA1649F.3090404@cafonso.ca>

Congrats to Sala!

fraternal regards

--c.a.

On 10/20/2011 09:18 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:
> Here is my report of the 2012 coordinator elections, as outgoing coordinator and returning officer.
> 
> 99 valid votes were cast.  Of these 14 (13.33%) were for Songitu Ekpe, 26 (24.76%) for Asif Kabani, 8 (7.62%) for Imran Ahmed Shah, and 51 (48.57%) for Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro.  I declare Sala as the next coordinator of the IGC.  Congratulations!  Many thanks also to the three runners-up, who are encouraged to re-apply next year.
> 
> 6 people began completing the ballot, but indicated that they had already voted in the election or did not respond to that question, so they were not given the opportunity to vote and did not do so.
> 
> In addition, there were 13 informal votes, from those who verified their eligibility to vote and were given the opportunity to do so, did not avail of that opportunity.  This probably reflects the preference expressed by a couple of people to me off-list for there to be a "none of the above" option.  The charter is silent about this, but because it defines membership for the purposes of charter amendment as only including those who voted in the last election, I did not feel that a "none of the above" option was unambiguously constitutional.  I was probably also influenced in this by my experience of other electoral systems, which do not allow for a "none of the above" option.
> 
> In future if we want to allow people to vote for "none of the above", in my view we should include this in the charter explicitly.  I will put this on the table during the charter review process that I have volunteered to coordinate now that I have ended my term.  My personal opinion is that such an amendment would be a bad idea, because it lessens the responsibility on all of us during the pre-election period to ensure that there is a slate of candidates at least one of whom everyone would be happy with.  (To avoid misunderstanding, I am not imputing to those who voted informally this year that they were unhappy with all of the candidates who stood.)  But what do you think?
> 
> The list of voting members will be updated on our website soon, probably within the next 48 hours.  Izumi and I will also be briefing Sala on her new role.
> 
____________________________________________________________
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


From ca at cafonso.ca  Fri Oct 21 08:27:28 2011
From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso)
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 10:27:28 -0200
Subject: [governance] IBSA - Tshwane Declaration
In-Reply-To: <CACfJzeuSi=i780Jwai=rhDVVdw8OR9izJ0rhA+m6A087vKVagA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4b2cbc0e-bc83-4238-ba44-a5ac4b52f2d7@email.android.com> <CACfJzeuSi=i780Jwai=rhDVVdw8OR9izJ0rhA+m6A087vKVagA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4EA16530.3090408@cafonso.ca>

Very good points, Rui.

--c.a.

On 10/21/2011 07:53 AM, Rui Correia wrote:
> Dear All
> 
> I am a bit confused as to the use of the word "declaration" here. Is the
> word being used liberally? I was not there and the IBSA site is not much
> help.
> 
> Let's be clear from the outset - I am not criticising the document, I am
> merely querying why it is being referred to as a declaration.The point I am
> making, is not about semantics, but rather about whether one might not risk
> putting too much importance on a document that was primarily meant to be a
> record of events.
> 
> The document looks like an internal account of what transpired during the
> meeting - like a memo or minutes on the discussion of agenda items.
> 
> It is written in the third person, so can it be taken to equate a
> declaration issued in the names of the three countries/ governments/ heads
> of state or government? Where is the "We" that indicates that whatever
> follows is indeed the will of the those that undersign it and is taken to
> mean that those who do so bind themselves to it?
> 
> It is also written in the past tense, enumerating a whole list of
> "reiterated", "reaffirmed", "acknowledged", etc. It is about 80% inward
> looking, about what IBSA mechanisms have done and very little about what is
> commits itself to doing for society.
> 
> Be it as it may that is is written in this format, who write it? Why is the
> author not identified, why is the due protocol for such a document not
> followed, according it the status of a declaration by signing it off with a
> mention of date and place.
> 
> So, to recap, is this a declaration?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Rui
> 
> 
> 
> 2011/10/19 Pranesh Prakash <pranesh at cis-india.org>
> 
>> Here's the relevant bit from the Tshwane Declaration.
>>
>> # Internet Governance
>> 52. The Leaders reaffirmed their commitment to working together towards a
>> people-centered, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society and
>> their agreement to continue to coordinate positions for the World Summit on
>> Information Society (WSIS) follow-up mechanisms, as well as in the other
>> fora and organizations related to the Information Society and Information
>> and Communication Technologies (ICTs).
>> 53. The Leaders expressed their satisfaction with the ongoing work in this
>> arena; recognized the role of the Internet as a catalyst for economic and
>> social progress; and emphasized its potential to enhance IBSA’s profile as a
>> key global player. The leaders reaffirmed the IBSA framework agreement for
>> Cooperation on the Information Society adopted on September 1