[governance] Re: critique of the IBSA proposal

[parminder]

Dear Katitza

On Sunday 18 September 2011 10:56 PM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote:
> Hi Parminder,
>
> We have shout loudly when we do not agree with issues at the OECD. 
> Here is a summary of other post other NGOs have written about. 
> http://csisac.org/2011/06/csisac_declines_to_support_oec.php

"We'' havent shouted at their *process* of, or the very effort at, 
international policy making in the area of IG.... That 'process' issue 
is the one under discussion, not the selective disagreements with some 
substantive issues. I hope the distinction appears clear.

With regard to a possible UN role, we are still at establishing a 
'process'. The question of substantive issues havent arisen. Though the 
IBSA statement of Dec 2011 does identify the following kinds of issues. 
To quote

                " Apart from technical aspects, the discussion on
        Internet governance has several critical public policy
        implications that necessitate the involvement of governments.
        These include among others, issues such as stability of the
        internet; interoperability; accessibility and openness (costs
        and human rights); network neutrality; access to knowledge and
        the balanced approach between openess, security and privacy
        aspects of the Internet; cybersecurity and the ICTs (as they
        relate to the Internet) and development nexus. A central issue
        in Internet governance is the management of Critical Internet
        Resources. "

(Remember, network neutrality and access to knowledge fail to make it to 
OECD's policy principle documents. So, yes, there will be good points 
and bad points in each forum and civil society will have to take 
positions accordingly. Democratic nature of the forum itself is however 
a meta, and prior, point, and is of course independently very important.)

However, as and when a democratic UN system does begin to take note of 
substantive international Internet-related public policy issues, I have 
do doubt that some such issues and positions will come up on which civil 
society will have to fight hard against, do all kinds of protests, walk 
outs, campaigns and other forms of advocacy and direct action,etc, one 
example of which in the OECD context you speak about above. Hope this 
clarifies.

Parminder


>
> Copyright is also one of the issues at stake in this overall mess. :)
>
> Best,
>
> Katitza
> On 9/18/11 10:22 AM, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <4E762233.9020601 at itforchange.net>, at 22:24:11 on Sun, 18 
>> Sep 2011, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> writes
>>> On the other hand, Milton why does it not surprise you when US comes 
>>> out with the International strategy for cyberspace without raising 
>>> it first at the IGF, ditto for OECD (shaping a bold new extra legal 
>>> and extra territorial IP enforcement regime)
>>
>> Actually, OECD had a workshop on that exact topic (if you mean the 
>> Liability of Intermediaries) at IGF last year. And of course civil 
>> society has their own representation at the table (CSISAC), even if 
>> they didn't agree with the communique issued by OECD earlier this year.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110921/428947f7/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