[governance] Fwd: WCIT: What's happened in the first week
William Drake
william.drake at uzh.ch
Fri Dec 7 14:15:04 EST 2012
Adam
Definitions come earlier. It's the same fight as in 1988, basically. I think Japan is on board but some others in APT are not.
Bill
On Dec 7, 2012, at 12:44 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
> Kieren's doing a great job reporting on WCIT.
>
> About "operating agencies", I thought the key text would be from article 6 of the constitution:
> "The Member States are also bound to take the necessary steps to impose the observance of the provisions of this Constitution, the Convention and the Administrative Regulations *upon operating agencies authorized* by them to establish and operate telecommunications and which engage in international services or which operate stations capable of causing harmful interference to the radio services of other countries."
>
> When there is disagreement over text for ITRs, or inconsistency between texts, the constitution prevails. And the constitution can only be modified in plenipotentiary meetings (net is 2014)
>
> Bill, Milton and others who understand this telecom stuff: thoughts? Any advice we give delegations?
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: .Nxt <info at dot-nxt.com>
> Date: Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 5:12 PM
> Subject: WCIT: What's happened in the first week
> To: apeake at gmail.com
>
>
> Week one of WCIT
> |
> December 6, 2012
>
> View in browser
>
> Forward to a friend
>
> Update profile
>
>
>
> Halfway through WCIT...
> A rundown of the World Conference on International Telecommunications's first week
>
>
>
>
> WCIT splits over the issue of "operating agencies"
> Conference can't move forward until it's agreed who the treaty actually applies to
> Continue Reading
> The World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) has dramatically split and may grind to a halt until a key distinction over whom precisely the resulting international treaty apply to is decided.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your guide to WCIT documentation
> Over 200 documents and thousands of pages. Here's how to make sense of it all
>
> Full breakdown of ITR changes
> Every proposal for change, broken down by article and sub-article
>
> So what exactly is WCIT?
> A simple guide to the conference next month
>
> How to follow events live at WCIT
> It's a closed conference. But not if you follow this guide.
>
>
>
> WCIT lowdown: it's all about Africa and Committee 5
>
> Our rough and ready guide to how the conference will pan out, who and what to watch, and a look at the bigger plans and strategies afoot.
>
> Continue Reading
>
>
>
> The dirty truth about WCIT
>
> The campaign waged against the conference has already achieved most of its goals, making ongoing accusations made against the ITU look increasingly hysterical. But how would the Internet organizations that claim to be under threat manage under the same level of scrutiny?
>
> Continue Reading
>
>
>
>
>
>
> WCIT
> Dubai, 3-14 December
>
>
>
> Verisign loses dot-com piggybank
>
> US government intervenes in contract renewal, raising questions about ICANN stewardship
>
> Continue Reading
>
>
> Verisign shares have plunged 15 percent, wiping $850 million off the company's value, on the news that it will not be allowed to raise prices on dot-com domains for the next six years.
> The current wholesale price for dot-coms stands at $7.85 and the company had already agreed a six-year extension on its right to exclusively sell the domains with DNS overseeing organization ICANN. That agreement mirrored one signed in 2006 that allowed Verisign to raise the price by seven percent in four of the six years the contract ran.
>
> However the contract was subject to approval by the US Department of Commerce and it decided to remove the price-rise clause before signing. A short statement issued by the DoC quoted Assistant Secretary Larry Strickling saying that "consumer will benefit from Verisign's removal of the automatic price increase".
>
>
>
>
> WCIT and the Internet? It all comes down to this document
>
> The lowdown on Russia's contribution 27.
>
> Continue Reading
>
>
> The focal point for those fears has become a contribution by the Russian Federation, sent on 13 November - 10 days after the announced deadline - and then revised four days later.
> Contribution 27 appears to confirm everything that people have been worrying about - an effort to use a revision of an international treaty agreed in 1988 to provide governments with additional controls over the functioning of the Internet.
>
> So here is a rundown of what is exactly in Contribution 27 - both the original and revised versions - and an analysis of what the implications of its adoption would be.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ITU backs away from IP address provision
>
> Efforts to make the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) into a supra-regional Internet registry have been ditched, at least for the time being. Attendees at the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA) were surprised with a last-minute proposal, aggressively pushed by the Arab States, that the ITU become a provider of IP addresses. Discussion within Committee 4 had been focused on the allocation of IP addresses and in particular the provision of IPv6 address blocks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Our predictions for WCIT
>
> Foolish as it may be, we have some predictions for what will happen between now and the end of WCIT. Here they are:
> Nothing radical will appear in the ITRs. Instead it will be agreed that they will be reviewed in four or eight years' time and a range of working groups will be formed to work on various issues and report to the Council next year, take it to the ITU Plenipotentiary for initial review in 2014, and onto the World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (WTSA) in 2016
> .
>
> .
>
>
>
>
> Day 2: Put off to tomorrow what you can't do today
>
> After a busy start, WCIT started to settle down into a familiar mode on the second day of the conference. The main highlights were:
> A bid by Canada and the US to get some key definitions agreed before work starts was pushed off until the end of the week
> The meeting delegates all agreed that they agreed with freedom of expression and human rights but that they didn't want to write it into a telecoms treaty - a press release was produced instead...
> .
>
>
> LinkedIn
>
> Twitter
>
> Facebook
>
> Google+
>
>
>
> You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website or at one of our conferences.
>
> Our mailing address is:
> .Nxt
> 426B Cole St
> San Francisco, CA 94117
>
> Add us to your address book
>
> Copyright © 2012 .Nxt, All rights reserved.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent to apeake at gmail.com — why did I get this?
> unsubscribe from this list | update subscription preferences
> .Nxt · 426B Cole St · San Francisco, CA 94117
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
> To 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/20121207/2d4e66cb/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list