[governance] ITU - summary of draft ITRs to date

[Milton L Mueller]

Let me give you a more specific example. 

A proposed change in the ITRs says, 

8A.4 "Member States shall take measures to ensure Internet stability and security, to fight cybercrime and to counter spam, while protecting and respecting the provisions for privacy and freedom of expression as contained in the relevant parts of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

Now if that passes, do you think the presence or absence of that provision in a treaty will have any impact whatsoever on the stability, security of the Internet, the level of spam, or the privacy and foe rights of Internet users? Do you think that the complex trade-offs between freedom of expression, privacy, and fighting cybercrime that have to be operationalized in the real world by ISPs, users and states are affected in any significant way by that? 

I don't. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-
> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Roland Perry
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 11:15 AM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] ITU - summary of draft ITRs to date
> 
> In message
> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2184C30 at SUEX10-mbx-
> 10.ad.syr.edu>, at
> 14:42:13 on Thu, 7 Jun 2012, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> writes
> >7 years after we all agreed to engage in "enhanced cooperation" we
> >have no consensus on what the term means, or whether it is happening or
> not,
> 
> And what's your view on UN-DESA's EC report put in front of CSTD a
> couple of years ago, full of feedback from various organisations on how
> they are getting on with it? None of them seemed to be in much doubt
> what it meant, or whether it was happening.
> 
>  >I draw the opposite conclusion; the verbal formulations in the Tunis
>  >Agenda, like the ITRs, actually have very little control over what
>  >really happens.
> 
> In the ITU world they rely *very* heavily on previously agreed wording
> to advance whatever agenda/programme they are currently discussing. The
> trail today often leads back a decade, when it comes to "you asked to do
> this, and here we are, still trying to do it".
> 
> eg I refer you to Resolution 146 from WTPF 2009 (Review of the ITRs)
> which invokes Antalya 2006, Marrakesh 2002 and Melbourne 1988.
> 
> <http://www.itu.int/osg/csd/wtpf/wtpf2009/documents/ITUresolution146_
> ITRs
> _PP06.html>
> 
> [Posted more for atmosphere than content].
> --
> Roland Perry


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