From kichango at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 18:09:48 2012 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:09:48 +0000 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? Just asking. mawaki On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: > > I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. > > Cheers > > N > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > ________________________________ > From: Carlos A. Afonso > To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br > Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM > Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > :) > > > > > Carlos A. Afonso > > William Drake escreveu: > My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email > > > On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: > > > Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... > > ========================================== > On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: > > Hi > > The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and > Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. > > Bill > > On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear list, > > Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. > > Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto > speaker, > and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender > balance > and also from developing region. > > And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking > points > into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be > added. > > May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? > > Many thanks, > > izumi > > > > > > 2012/10/11 William Drake : > > it's what they're sending registrants > > On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: > > What? When did this happen? > > On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: > > In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly > disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have > speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal > privacy protection in Internet governance. > > Best > > Bill > > On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: > > +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire > Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I > would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active > national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some > countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear > overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or > think it is an NGO thing. > > Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that > "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own > > Best > > Nnenna > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG > | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > ________________________________ > From: Milton L Mueller > To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" > > Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM > Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > > From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque > > I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not > 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as > their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking > abilities when we nominate them. > > Ginger and colleagues: > Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there > been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more > important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is > the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" > at the moment, so… > > let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately > believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address > them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope > others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, > development…I defer to others there. > > Human rights > CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global > communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of > the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of > information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to > freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national > Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny > individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. > All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal > and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and > should not involve prior restraint. > > Security and Securitization > CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would > foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or > private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware > for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are > deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are > skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and > communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that > Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and > that national security and military agendas often work against rather than > for users' security needs. > > Multistakeholderism > Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS > welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that > multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder > participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance > institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not > by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the > best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces > created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and > corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. > MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, > separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. > > 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.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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- > > 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.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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Wed Oct 31 18:29:51 2012 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:29:51 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <77843C2D-FF1E-4FF7-BA2C-5199F3622B4E@privaterra.org> To be honest, in my opinion, the process to select speakers for the main opening session has seemed ad-hoc at best. Would have expected a far more deliberate process along the lines that the caucus reviews, recommends and nominates persons for the MAG. Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2012-10-31, at 6:09 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Hi, > > ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us > nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here > (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been > running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the > Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared > discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? > > Just asking. > > mawaki > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: >> >> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. >> >> Cheers >> >> N >> >> >> >> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Carlos A. Afonso >> To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM >> Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> :) >> >> >> >> >> Carlos A. Afonso >> >> William Drake escreveu: >> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email >> >> >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: >> >> >> Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... >> >> ========================================== >> On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and >> Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> Dear list, >> >> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >> >> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto >> speaker, >> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender >> balance >> and also from developing region. >> >> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking >> points >> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be >> added. >> >> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >> >> Many thanks, >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >> >> it's what they're sending registrants >> >> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >> >> What? When did this happen? >> >> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >> >> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >> privacy protection in Internet governance. >> >> Best >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >> >> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I >> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >> think it is an NGO thing. >> >> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >> >> Best >> >> Nnenna >> >> >> >> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG >> | Consultants >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Milton L Mueller >> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> >> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >> >> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >> abilities when we nominate them. >> >> Ginger and colleagues: >> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >> at the moment, so… >> >> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >> development…I defer to others there. >> >> Human rights >> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >> should not involve prior restraint. >> >> Security and Securitization >> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >> for users' security needs. >> >> Multistakeholderism >> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >> >> 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.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 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> -- >> >> 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.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 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 18:40:51 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 11:40:51 +1300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <77843C2D-FF1E-4FF7-BA2C-5199F3622B4E@privaterra.org> References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <77843C2D-FF1E-4FF7-BA2C-5199F3622B4E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: yes it took me by surprise as well Mawaki. :O Sala On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: > To be honest, in my opinion, the process to select speakers for the main > opening session has seemed ad-hoc at best. > > Would have expected a far more deliberate process along the lines that the > caucus reviews, recommends and nominates persons for the MAG. > > Robert > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2012-10-31, at 6:09 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us > > nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here > > (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been > > running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the > > Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared > > discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? > > > > Just asking. > > > > mawaki > > > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: > >> > >> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> N > >> > >> > >> > >> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> From: Carlos A. Afonso > >> To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br > >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > >> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM > >> Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > >> > >> :) > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Carlos A. Afonso > >> > >> William Drake escreveu: > >> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email > >> > >> > >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: > >> > >> > >> Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... > >> > >> ========================================== > >> On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: > >> > >> Hi > >> > >> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and > >> Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. > >> > >> Bill > >> > >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> > >> Dear list, > >> > >> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. > >> > >> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto > >> speaker, > >> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender > >> balance > >> and also from developing region. > >> > >> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking > >> points > >> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be > >> added. > >> > >> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? > >> > >> Many thanks, > >> > >> izumi > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 2012/10/11 William Drake : > >> > >> it's what they're sending registrants > >> > >> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: > >> > >> What? When did this happen? > >> > >> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: > >> > >> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly > >> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have > >> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of > personal > >> privacy protection in Internet governance. > >> > >> Best > >> > >> Bill > >> > >> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: > >> > >> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire > >> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. > However, I > >> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to > active > >> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some > >> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear > >> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note > interested or > >> think it is an NGO thing. > >> > >> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that > >> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own > >> > >> Best > >> > >> Nnenna > >> > >> > >> > >> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG > >> | Consultants > >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ > >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > >> > >> ________________________________ > >> From: Milton L Mueller > >> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" > >> > >> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM > >> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > >> > >> > >> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger > Paque > >> > >> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' > not > >> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as > significant as > >> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as > speaking > >> abilities when we nominate them. > >> > >> Ginger and colleagues: > >> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there > >> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is > more > >> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium > is > >> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on > "what" > >> at the moment, so… > >> > >> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately > >> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to > address > >> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope > >> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include > IPR, > >> development…I defer to others there. > >> > >> Human rights > >> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global > >> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article > 19 of > >> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of > >> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to > >> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national > >> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny > >> individuals access to applications, content and services of their > choice. > >> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information > illegal > >> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law > and > >> should not involve prior restraint. > >> > >> Security and Securitization > >> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would > >> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments > and/or > >> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and > malware > >> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they > are > >> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. > We are > >> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information > and > >> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that > >> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level > and > >> that national security and military agendas often work against rather > than > >> for users' security needs. > >> > >> Multistakeholderism > >> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS > >> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that > >> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that > multi-stakeholder > >> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance > >> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does > not > >> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or > that the > >> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal > spaces > >> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental > and > >> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet > users. > >> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due > process, > >> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. > >> > >> 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.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 > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >> -- > >> > >> 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.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 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Wed Oct 31 18:42:43 2012 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:42:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <77843C2D-FF1E-4FF7-BA2C-5199F3622B4E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <1351723363.30961.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> me too :)   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:40 PM Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku yes it took me by surprise as well Mawaki. :O Sala On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Robert Guerra wrote: To be honest, in my opinion, the process to select speakers for the main opening session has seemed ad-hoc at best. > >Would have expected a far more deliberate process along the lines that the caucus reviews, recommends and nominates persons for the MAG. > > >Robert >-- >R. Guerra >Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > >On 2012-10-31, at 6:09 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us >> nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here >> (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been >> running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the >> Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared >> discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? >> >> Just asking. >> >> mawaki >> >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: >>> >>> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> N >>> >>> >>> >>> Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants >>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Carlos A. Afonso >>> To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br >>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM >>> Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>> >>> :) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Carlos A. Afonso >>> >>> William Drake escreveu: >>> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email >>> >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: >>> >>> >>> Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... >>> >>> ========================================== >>> On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and >>> Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>> Dear list, >>> >>> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >>> >>> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto >>> speaker, >>> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender >>> balance >>> and also from developing region. >>> >>> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking >>> points >>> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be >>> added. >>> >>> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >>> >>> it's what they're sending registrants >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >>> >>> What? When did this happen? >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>> >>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>> >>> +1 On each of the points below.  I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited.  However, I >>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >>> think it is an NGO thing. >>> >>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> >>> >>> Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG >>>  |  Consultants >>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ >>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Milton L Mueller >>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>> >>> >>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >>> >>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >>> abilities when we nominate them. >>> >>> Ginger and colleagues: >>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>> the message."  At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >>> at the moment, so… >>> >>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >>> development…I defer to others there. >>> >>> Human rights >>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>> should not involve prior restraint. >>> >>> Security and Securitization >>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >>> for users' security needs. >>> >>> Multistakeholderism >>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >>> participation is not an end in itself.  Opening up global governance >>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>> >>> 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.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 >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 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.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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851   ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Oct 31 20:54:01 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:54:01 -0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku Message-ID: To be honest, this discussion started in this list several weeks ago, Robert. What is your proposal? --c.a. Carlos A. AfonsoRobert Guerra escreveu:To be honest, in my opinion, the process to select speakers for the main opening session has seemed ad-hoc at best. Would have expected a far more deliberate process along the lines that the caucus reviews, recommends and nominates persons for the MAG. Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2012-10-31, at 6:09 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Hi, > > ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us > nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here > (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been > running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the > Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared > discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? > > Just asking. > > mawaki > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: >> >> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. >> >> Cheers >> >> N >> >> >> >> Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Carlos A. Afonso >> To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br >> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM >> Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> :) >> >> >> >> >> Carlos A. Afonso >> >> William Drake escreveu: >> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email >> >> >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: >> >> >> Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... >> >> ========================================== >> On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and >> Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> Dear list, >> >> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >> >> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto >> speaker, >> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender >> balance >> and also from developing region. >> >> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking >> points >> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be >> added. >> >> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >> >> Many thanks, >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >> >> it's what they're sending registrants >> >> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >> >> What? When did this happen? >> >> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >> >> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >> privacy protection in Internet governance. >> >> Best >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >> >> +1 On each of the points below.  I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited.  However, I >> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >> think it is an NGO thing. >> >> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >> >> Best >> >> Nnenna >> >> >> >> Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG >>  |  Consultants >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Milton L Mueller >> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> >> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >> >> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >> abilities when we nominate them. >> >> Ginger and colleagues: >> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >> the message."  At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >> at the moment, so… >> >> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >> development…I defer to others there. >> >> Human rights >> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >> should not involve prior restraint. >> >> Security and Securitization >> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >> for users' security needs. >> >> Multistakeholderism >> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >> participation is not an end in itself.  Opening up global governance >> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >> >> 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.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 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> -- >> >> 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.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 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Oct 31 21:30:15 2012 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 10:30:15 +0900 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <1351723363.30961.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <77843C2D-FF1E-4FF7-BA2C-5199F3622B4E@privaterra.org> <1351723363.30961.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: It is in part my fault for not wrapping up the discussion quickly, to select the speakers and liaise to the Secretariat. So sorry about this delay. I guess IGF Secretariat chose one from IGC members and another one from non-IGC. They had indicated that the speaker does not have to be IGC member per se. IGC is not the sole representative of the Civil Society for IGF. Yet I believe Valentina will also be an excellent speaker, especially from Central/East Europe. izumi 2012/11/1 shaila mistry : > me too :) > > The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! > ..................... the renaissance of composure ! > > ________________________________ > From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra > Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:40 PM > Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > yes it took me by surprise as well Mawaki. :O > > Sala > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Robert Guerra > wrote: > > To be honest, in my opinion, the process to select speakers for the main > opening session has seemed ad-hoc at best. > > Would have expected a far more deliberate process along the lines that the > caucus reviews, recommends and nominates persons for the MAG. > > Robert > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > On 2012-10-31, at 6:09 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us >> nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here >> (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been >> running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the >> Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared >> discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? >> >> Just asking. >> >> mawaki >> >> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: >>> >>> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> N >>> >>> >>> >>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Carlos A. Afonso >>> To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br >>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM >>> Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>> >>> :) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Carlos A. Afonso >>> >>> William Drake escreveu: >>> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email >>> >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: >>> >>> >>> Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... >>> >>> ========================================== >>> On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and >>> Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>> Dear list, >>> >>> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >>> >>> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto >>> speaker, >>> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender >>> balance >>> and also from developing region. >>> >>> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking >>> points >>> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be >>> added. >>> >>> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >>> >>> it's what they're sending registrants >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >>> >>> What? When did this happen? >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>> >>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of >>> personal >>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>> >>> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, >>> I >>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to >>> active >>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested >>> or >>> think it is an NGO thing. >>> >>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> >>> >>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG >>> | Consultants >>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ >>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Milton L Mueller >>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>> >>> >>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger >>> Paque >>> >>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' >>> not >>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant >>> as >>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as >>> speaking >>> abilities when we nominate them. >>> >>> Ginger and colleagues: >>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is >>> more >>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on >>> "what" >>> at the moment, so… >>> >>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to >>> address >>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include >>> IPR, >>> development…I defer to others there. >>> >>> Human rights >>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 >>> of >>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information >>> illegal >>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>> should not involve prior restraint. >>> >>> Security and Securitization >>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments >>> and/or >>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We >>> are >>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather >>> than >>> for users' security needs. >>> >>> Multistakeholderism >>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that >>> multi-stakeholder >>> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does >>> not >>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that >>> the >>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal >>> spaces >>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet >>> users. >>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due >>> process, >>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>> >>> 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.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 >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> -- >>> >>> 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.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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Wed Oct 31 22:55:24 2012 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 22:55:24 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <77843C2D-FF1E-4FF7-BA2C-5199F3622B4E@privaterra.org> <1351723363.30961.YahooMailNeo@web160506.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Let's be clear, I don't have an issue with the people that were selected. Just the process, or lack of one, that was used. Suggest we focus on a way to develop a far more transparent and in dependant process next time Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 2012-10-31, at 9:30 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > It is in part my fault for not wrapping up the discussion quickly, to > select the speakers > and liaise to the Secretariat. So sorry about this delay. > > I guess IGF Secretariat chose one from IGC members and another one from non-IGC. > > They had indicated that the speaker does not have to be IGC member per se. > > IGC is not the sole representative of the Civil Society for IGF. > > Yet I believe Valentina will also be an excellent speaker, especially from > Central/East Europe. > > > izumi > > > > 2012/11/1 shaila mistry : >> me too :) >> >> The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! >> ..................... the renaissance of composure ! >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >> >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra >> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 3:40 PM >> Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> yes it took me by surprise as well Mawaki. :O >> >> Sala >> >> On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Robert Guerra >> wrote: >> >> To be honest, in my opinion, the process to select speakers for the main >> opening session has seemed ad-hoc at best. >> >> Would have expected a far more deliberate process along the lines that the >> caucus reviews, recommends and nominates persons for the MAG. >> >> Robert >> -- >> R. Guerra >> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >> >> On 2012-10-31, at 6:09 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> ... Still, I'm not sure I understand the process that got us >>> nominating people and end up with a name that was never mentioned here >>> (this is nothing personal). Were there other CS groups that had been >>> running the same nomination process? Is this at the discretion of the >>> Secretariat? And what happens now to the idea of collectively prepared >>> discourse or talking points, and to Milton's good start on that? >>> >>> Just asking. >>> >>> mawaki >>> >>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Nnenna wrote: >>>> >>>> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> N >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >>>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Carlos A. Afonso >>>> To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br >>>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>>> >>>> :) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Carlos A. Afonso >>>> >>>> William Drake escreveu: >>>> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... >>>> >>>> ========================================== >>>> On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi >>>> >>>> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and >>>> Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >>>> >>>> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto >>>> speaker, >>>> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender >>>> balance >>>> and also from developing region. >>>> >>>> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking >>>> points >>>> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be >>>> added. >>>> >>>> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >>>> >>>> Many thanks, >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >>>> >>>> it's what they're sending registrants >>>> >>>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >>>> >>>> What? When did this happen? >>>> >>>> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>>> >>>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of >>>> personal >>>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, >>>> I >>>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to >>>> active >>>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested >>>> or >>>> think it is an NGO thing. >>>> >>>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Nnenna >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG >>>> | Consultants >>>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ >>>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Milton L Mueller >>>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>>> >>>> >>>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger >>>> Paque >>>> >>>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' >>>> not >>>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant >>>> as >>>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as >>>> speaking >>>> abilities when we nominate them. >>>> >>>> Ginger and colleagues: >>>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is >>>> more >>>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>>> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on >>>> "what" >>>> at the moment, so… >>>> >>>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to >>>> address >>>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include >>>> IPR, >>>> development…I defer to others there. >>>> >>>> Human rights >>>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 >>>> of >>>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information >>>> illegal >>>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>>> should not involve prior restraint. >>>> >>>> Security and Securitization >>>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments >>>> and/or >>>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We >>>> are >>>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather >>>> than >>>> for users' security needs. >>>> >>>> Multistakeholderism >>>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that >>>> multi-stakeholder >>>> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >>>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does >>>> not >>>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that >>>> the >>>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal >>>> spaces >>>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet >>>> users. >>>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due >>>> process, >>>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>>> >>>> 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.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 >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> 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.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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- >>> 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Tue Oct 30 21:47:55 2012 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 08:47:55 +0700 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <8A9113EA-A478-4093-94BE-4A1A8C6B4910@virtualized.org> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508F7E73.70307@cavebear.com> <8A9113EA-A478-4093-94BE-4A1A8C6B4910@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <5090834B.4020409@gmx.net> On 10/30/2012 10:48 PM, [somebody] wrote: > wonk code Have mercy with us who are still not native speakers of the language of the Angels=Anglish-English: = = *wonk* Concise Oxford English Dictionary © 2008 Oxford University Press: wonk/wɒŋk/ ▶noun N. Amer. informal, derogatory * 1 a studious or hard-working person. ■ (often policy wonk) a person who takes an excessive interest in minor details of political policy. * 2 nautical slang an incompetent or inexperienced sailor, especially a naval cadet. – derivatives *wonkish *adjective. – origin 1920s: of unknown origin. = = Do I now understand this sentence: "I suspect this is policy wonk code for national-level control/administration of RPKI/BGPSEC." Somewhat. - Not really. Norbert Klein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Oct 1 03:23:34 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 12:53:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] Google's officer with detention order in brasil In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> On Friday 28 September 2012 10:01 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > What about the users? Shouldn’t they have a say in the rules? > Milton They should use democratic processes, and if the processes are not fine, fight to have the right processes. This is the history of struggles for democracy, which continue, although a new neoliberal discourse has been trying to confuse them through concepts like users rights (whats wrong with people's rights!), multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy), internet exceptionalism and so on. > > Are you proposing to re-territorialize the Internet so that national > governments can have full authority? > You of course realise that US gov has full authority over its own digital space, and considerable authority over that of other countries. Thus it may be more useful to direct civil society fire power where the illegitimate concentration of power lies. However, even if one is to take your hint, and seek non-national global law for the global Internet (and I understand, at least hope, that you still are believer in the rule of law unlike the naive anarchist view that seem to dominate a certain techie mindset), I have failed to see any proposals from you for framing global laws for, what we both agree is and should be preserved as a, global Internet. You have mostly opined that, for instance in case of ICANN oversight, US laws being applied to the world is rather ok. You oppose internationalism for global law making, and have neither proposed any evolutionary improvements to internationalism(as ITfC has proposed), or, as I far I know, even any radical improvements. Challenging application of national laws on the Internet in developing countries (the fact of a particular law being bad is a very different issues and should be dealt by democratic and civil society processes) and instead advocating application of US globally does not make for a very convincing case. > snip > Google or any other multinational social media provider isn’t perfect. > But terms of use constitute a private ordering that users can opt out > of if they don’t use the service. Who in Brazil (or any other country) > gets to opt out of dumb laws and dumb judges? > You are telling people to submit to a corporatist ordering of our social systems. 'you can opt out if you wish' is often an insulting proposition by those who control to the controlled, when structural realities make such a proposition rather meaningless. Like those calling for a fair and just globalisation being told, well, if you dont like it, you can opt out of globalisation as it is occurring now. On the other hand, I do understand that in the new neoliberal global world order, their is this new political direction of richer classes in most countries (especially, but not only, developing countries) to seek to opt out of the democratic order they are 'subject to' in favour of a new post-democratic global order whose political capital lies in the US, because whether they like it or not, any new system still needs some kind of political coercive authority, for instance to make those early dawn knocks to catch people doing things as dangerous as sharing video files. Also, that reminds me, what about the desire of non US people to 'opt out of dumb laws and judges' of the US.... like in the case of their involvement in ICANN oversight/ interference... to those who want such an opt out, you have said that US laws and judges are good and should continue to overlord over the ICANN (for whatever 'minimalist' areas that you lay down). When you want Brazilians to be able to opt out of Brazilian dumb laws and judges, your lack of sympathy for non USians to seek opting out of the dumb US laws and judges' supervision of ICANN, when they are not even 'formally' accountable other than to the US public, looks rather self-contradictory. parminder > > *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Thiago > Tavares Nunes de Oliveira > *Sent:* Friday, September 28, 2012 11:07 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Ivar A. M. Hartmann > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Google's officer with detention order in > brasil > > Em 28/09/2012, às 10:35, Ivar A. M. Hartmann escreveu: > > > > For those overlooking the key issue in this and similar cases in > Brazil, it is not whether Google wants to secure its holding as a > market leader or ensure its profit. The key issue is free speech. > > No, is it NOT. The key issue is about power, as highlighted on this > Der Spiegel article: > http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/how-google-lobbies-german-government-over-internet-regulation-a-857654.html > > The key issue on democracy countries like Brazil is: > > "who sets the rules in this business: Google, with its terms of use, > or the government and courts?" > > I remember you that this was NOT the first time that the chief of > Google's office in Brazil faces criminal charges for not comply with > brazilians court orders. The former Google Brazil president (now > Facebook VP for Latin America) was indicted in 2006/07 for not comply > with dozens of brazilians court orders that demanded Orkut users data > to assist brazilian law enforcement authorities on child sexual abuse > and neonazi cases: > http://www.prsp.mpf.gov.br/prdc/sala-de-imprensa/noticias_prdc/noticia-3294 > (english auto translation: http://bit.ly/S62POw) > > ps: an english background reading on this case is avaliable on WSJ > website: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119273558149563775.html > > > -- > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivírus e > acredita-se estar livre de perigo. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Oct 1 03:52:32 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 09:52:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] Principles References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Parminder: multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) Wolfgang: Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy Parminder: improvements to internationalism & national laws Wolfgang: To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of information "regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave or enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for individuals in developing countries. In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the last two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form a WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF in 2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. wolfgang -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Mon Oct 1 04:17:46 2012 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 17:17:46 +0900 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Wouldn't this be something to build into the WSIS +10 review rather than the IGF alone? Best, Adam On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 4:52 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > Parminder: > multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) > > Wolfgang: > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy > > Parminder: > improvements to internationalism & national laws > > Wolfgang: > To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of information "regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave or enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for individuals in developing countries. > > In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the last two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form a WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF in 2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. > > wolfgang > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Mon Oct 1 04:51:16 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 10:51:16 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> Whoow !   Wolfgang Wrote   Message du 01/10/12 09:52 > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "parminder" , governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : [governance] Principles > > Parminder: > multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) > > Wolfgang: > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy > > Parminder: > improvements to internationalism & national laws > > Wolfgang: > To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of information "regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave or enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for individuals in developing countries. > > In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the last two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form a WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF in 2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. > > wolfgang > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Oct 1 05:52:49 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 11:52:49 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Principles References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Hi Jean Louis, like always: if you try to be short your produce misunderstandings. My reference point is the "round table" philosophy we had in 1989 after the collapse of the German Democratic Repuiblic and which was - at least in my eyes - a very high form of a participatory democracy. This was killed within months by our west German brothers who said that such an involvement of all stakeholders is not needed in a representative democracy. WSIS has proofed that the involvement of non-govenrmental stakeholders, in particular civil society, in affairs which had been so far negotiated only by the representatives of governments, is not a bad idea. The multistakeholder model offers an option to bring all parties on a equal footing into the process of a PDP, case by case. I agree that the existing models (IGF, ICANN) are far away from the ideal, but they are first steps into the right direction. The alternative - back to the intergovernmental treaty system - would be in my eyes a step backwards. This is not an argument against the intergovernmental treaty system (where needed), we need international law and the Charter of the United Nations with its jus cogens principles is a good document. But I see that such a intergovernmental treaty system needs additional (external) checks and balances and has today be embedded into a multistakeholder environment. The WGIG definition speaks about "shared decision making procedures". At the end this will lead us to a discussion about the meaing of national (governmental) sovereignty in a globalised Internet based world. It would make sense to start a discussion how to enhance our understanding of "sovereingty" and "self-determination" (two jus cogens principles from the UN Charter) in the Internet age. How a "shared sovereignty" (some people call it "collaborative sovereignty") could look like? Is this only for governments or should civil society and other Non-governmental stakeholders be part of this enhanced understanding of sovereignty? Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jean-Louis FULLSACK Gesendet: Mo 01.10.2012 10:51 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; parminder Betreff: re: [governance] Principles Whoow ! Wolfgang Wrote Message du 01/10/12 09:52 > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "parminder" , governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : [governance] Principles > > Parminder: > multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) > > Wolfgang: > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy > > Parminder: > improvements to internationalism & national laws > > Wolfgang: > To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of information "regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave or enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for individuals in developing countries. > > In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the last two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form a WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF in 2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. > > wolfgang > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Oct 1 08:59:20 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 08:59:20 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> Wolfgang and all, I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a series of multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in several African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons which I won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective as an inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far from what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, as in some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the notions of management with democracy). The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of interests it is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those interests. So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might be a very effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is in many instances a very open question subject to for example, the personailities of individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to contribute to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative would still leave open the question of overall democractic governance and accountability of the Internet. Best, Mike -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 5:53 AM To: Jean-Louis FULLSACK; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: AW: [governance] Principles Hi Jean Louis, like always: if you try to be short your produce misunderstandings. My reference point is the "round table" philosophy we had in 1989 after the collapse of the German Democratic Repuiblic and which was - at least in my eyes - a very high form of a participatory democracy. This was killed within months by our west German brothers who said that such an involvement of all stakeholders is not needed in a representative democracy. WSIS has proofed that the involvement of non-govenrmental stakeholders, in particular civil society, in affairs which had been so far negotiated only by the representatives of governments, is not a bad idea. The multistakeholder model offers an option to bring all parties on a equal footing into the process of a PDP, case by case. I agree that the existing models (IGF, ICANN) are far away from the ideal, but they are first steps into the right direction. The alternative - back to the intergovernmental treaty system - would be in my eyes a step backwards. This is not an argument against the intergovernmental treaty system (where needed), we need international law and the Charter of the United Nations with its jus cogens principles is a good document. But I see that such a intergovernmental treaty system needs additional (external) checks and balances and has today be embedded into a multistakeholder environment. The WGIG definition speaks about "shared decision making procedures". At the end this will lead us to a discussion about the meaing of national (governmental) sovereignty in a globalised Internet based world. It would make sense to start a discussion how to enhance our understanding of "sovereingty" and "self-determination" (two jus cogens principles from the UN Charter) in the Internet age. How a "shared sovereignty" (some people call it "collaborative sovereignty") could look like? Is this only for governments or should civil society and other Non-governmental stakeholders be part of this enhanced understanding of sovereignty? Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jean-Louis FULLSACK Gesendet: Mo 01.10.2012 10:51 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; parminder Betreff: re: [governance] Principles Whoow ! Wolfgang Wrote Message du 01/10/12 09:52 > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "parminder" , governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : [governance] Principles > > Parminder: > multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) > > Wolfgang: > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy > > Parminder: > improvements to internationalism & national laws > > Wolfgang: > To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of information "regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave or enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for individuals in developing countries. > > In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the last two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form a WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF in 2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. > > wolfgang > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at Mon Oct 1 09:16:13 2012 From: wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at (Benedek, Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at)) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:16:13 +0200 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear all, I'm another Wolfgang, who has written recently in a book on Human Rights Diplomacy edited by Michael O'Flaherty et al. about THE RELEVANCE OF THE MULTI-STAKEHOLDER APPROACHAND MULTI-TRACK DIPLOMACY FOR HUMAN RIGHTS DIPLOMACY. Here is an excerpt: Examples from PracticePractice shows that a number of states and international and supranational organisations have used both, the concept of multi-track diplomacy and the notion of multi-stakeholder partnerships (and their combination) in their eff orts to conduct a more comprehensive, holistic and sustainable human rights diplomacy. Th e following examples from practice show both the advantages and the potential pitfalls of these approaches. One example for the potential of the multi-stakeholder approach in the context of the governance of the information society is the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) that was established aft er the World Summit on the Information Society in Geneva and Tunis in 2003 and 2005. Th e IGF¹s mandate is to bring together all stakeholders ­ i.e. governments, international organisations, business, NGOs and academics ­ to discuss all issues concerning the information society on a yearly basis.11 Th e IGF cannot take decisions, nor even draft recommendations or common conclusions.12 But the discussion process involving multiple stakeholders generates results through creative, lively and open debate, and through persuasive policy suggestions in reaction to common problems. Th e disadvantage of the process is that results are less visible and/or less clear-cut. Th ey are, nonetheless, quite real. IGF participants 0001326829,INDD_PG3298 252 7/19/2011 2:34:54 PM multi-stakeholder approach and multi-trade diplomacy 253 13 Th ese include inter alia the yearly European Dialogue on Internet Governance (EuroDIG) (http://www.eurodig.org), the national Internet Governance Forum in the US in July 2010 (http://igfusa.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/2010-igf-usa-at-georgetown -law-center-in-dc-july-21), sub-regional forums, such as the one held in Uganda in September 2010 (http://www.eaigf.or.ke), and regional forums like the Asian Forum in June 2010 (http://rigf.asia) [all last accessed 3 December 2010]. 14 See C. Malena, ŒStrategic Partnership: Challenges and Best Practices in the Management and Governance of Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships Involving UN and Civil Society Actors¹ (2004) Background paper for the Multi-Stakeholder Workshop on Partnerships and UN-Civil Society Relations, New York, available at: http:// www.un.org/reform/civilsociety/pdfs/pocantino_booklet.pdf [last accessed 22 August 2010]. include key people of the information society who take the results back to their institutions. Th is decentralised distribution of results by diff erent members of the information society has contributed to the success of the IGF. Apart from that, the successful formula of multistakeholderism as exemplifi ed by the IGF has been copied by regional and even national internet governance forums.13 Strangely enough, representatives from the UN human rights system were present in the person of the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression only since the IGF in Sharm el Sheikh in 2009, even though stakeholders discuss a large number of human rights issues, for example child protection or freedom of expression. Th e Council of Europe by contrast actively uses the IGF as an opportunity to advance its human rights agenda, and has participated with a large delegation since the Forum was founded. Th e UN Educational, Scientifi c and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), human rights NGOs and academics specialised in human rights are also among the participants. Th is experience raises the question of whether the multi-stakeholder approach ­ and even multi-stakeholder partnerships which have a stronger continuity ­ could also be used to increase the eff ectiveness of UN human rights bodies, and to give a fresh momentum to the discussion about strategies to be pursued in their reform process. Th is discussion also resembles the debate on UN partnerships: a partnership- based approach is relied on by the UN to strengthen their activities in the fi elds of development and human rights in order to implement goals more eff ectively.14 In the past, multi-track diplomacy has developed mainly in the context of ensuring or restoring peace and security. Th e observation underlying the multi-track approach is that diplomacy is not only a 0001326829,INDD_PG3298 253 7/19/2011 2:34:54 PM 254 wolfgang benedek 15 Compare the nine diff erent tracks of diplomacy identifi ed for multi-track diplomacy: Institute for Multi-Track Diplomacy, ŒWhat is Multi-Track Diplomacy?¹. 16 See Asia-Europe Foundation, Th e Th ird Informal ASEM Seminar on Human Rights, Singapore 2000. matter for diplomats, but also for a variety of other, oft en non-state actors including civil society, individual citizens, NGOs, or church groups like San Egidio in Rome, but also academic institutions or business ­ with the role of the media deserving special attention.15 Th ink tanks can play a major role in multi-track diplomacy and other institutions can make essential contributions through funding other actors. In the context of human rights diplomacy, the EU practice of funding a substantial research agenda in the fi eld of human rights is worth mentioning. Fourteen diff erent consortia conducting EU-funded research in the fi eld of human rights and democracy in the wider sense met for the fi rst time in December 2008 in Brussels. Best regards Wolfgang Univ.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Benedek Institute for International Law and International Relations University of Graz Universitätsstraße 15, A4 A-8010 Graz Tel.: +43/316/380/3411 Fax: +43/316/380/9455 Am 01.10.12 14:59 schrieb "michael gurstein" unter : >Wolfgang and all, > >I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a series of >multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in several >African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons which I >won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... > >However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while >`multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective as an >inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far from >what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, as in >some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the >notions >of management with democracy). > >The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of interests >it >is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those >interests. >So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might be a >very >effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder >farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is in >many >instances a very open question subject to for example, the personailities >of >individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political >interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former >affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such >processes >could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of >the >term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. > >I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi-stakeholder >governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to >contribute >to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative would >still >leave open the question of overall democractic governance and >accountability >of the Internet. > >Best, > >Mike > >-----Original Message----- >From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >[mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of "Kleinwächter, >Wolfgang" >Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 5:53 AM >To: Jean-Louis FULLSACK; governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Subject: AW: [governance] Principles > >Hi Jean Louis, > >like always: if you try to be short your produce misunderstandings. My >reference point is the "round table" philosophy we had in 1989 after the >collapse of the German Democratic Repuiblic and which was - at least in my >eyes - a very high form of a participatory democracy. This was killed >within >months by our west German brothers who said that such an involvement of >all >stakeholders is not needed in a representative democracy. WSIS has proofed >that the involvement of non-govenrmental stakeholders, in particular civil >society, in affairs which had been so far negotiated only by the >representatives of governments, is not a bad idea. > >The multistakeholder model offers an option to bring all parties on a >equal >footing into the process of a PDP, case by case. I agree that the existing >models (IGF, ICANN) are far away from the ideal, but they are first steps >into the right direction. The alternative - back to the intergovernmental >treaty system - would be in my eyes a step backwards. This is not an >argument against the intergovernmental treaty system (where needed), we >need >international law and the Charter of the United Nations with its jus >cogens >principles is a good document. But I see that such a intergovernmental >treaty system needs additional (external) checks and balances and has >today >be embedded into a multistakeholder environment. The WGIG definition >speaks >about "shared decision making procedures". At the end this will lead us >to a >discussion about the meaing of national (governmental) sovereignty in a >globalised Internet based world. > >It would make sense to start a discussion how to enhance our understanding >of "sovereingty" and "self-determination" (two jus cogens principles from >the UN Charter) in the Internet age. How a "shared sovereignty" (some >people >call it "collaborative sovereignty") could look like? Is this only for >governments or should civil society and other Non-governmental >stakeholders >be part of this enhanced understanding of sovereignty? > >Wolfgang > > >________________________________ > >Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jean-Louis >FULLSACK >Gesendet: Mo 01.10.2012 10:51 >An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Kleinwächter, Wolfgang; parminder >Betreff: re: [governance] Principles > > > >Whoow ! > > > >Wolfgang Wrote > > > > > > >What's the next step ? Maybe > >Multistakeholderism will BE democracy > > > >Not for me, neither in its current "version" nor in its possible future > > > >Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > > Message du 01/10/12 09:52 > > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "parminder" , >governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Copie à : > > Objet : [governance] Principles > > > > Parminder: > > multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) > > > > Wolfgang: > > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory >democracy > > > > Parminder: > > improvements to internationalism & national laws > > > > Wolfgang: > > To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of >information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human >right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under >international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of >information >"regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the >Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to >global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave >or >enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and >would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for >individuals in developing countries. > > > > In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the >work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet >Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the >ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles >declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the >last >two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous >non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights >and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form >a >WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 >meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the >aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF >in >2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. > > > > wolfgang > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Mon Oct 1 10:07:43 2012 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 21:07:43 +0700 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> Interesting and important. My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand.” There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is not defined. So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists*(*the*“Na*tionalso*zi*alisten*” = Nazi”),*with the help of the German National People's Party , were victorious in elections inMarch 1933 –starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many others too. “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people governs. But how? The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has raised serious concerns becausethe electoral system – especially the National Election Committee – is controlled by government appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia havethe same vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual situations where we live it meansalso: How do we move towards the good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are central? It is on this background that I well understand theshort statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet Governance: “Multistakeholderism**IS** the highest form of participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? Norbert Klein Phnom Penh/Cambodia = On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Wolfgang and all, > > I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a series of > multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in several > African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons which I > won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... > > However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while > `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective as an > inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far from > what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, as in > some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the notions > of management with democracy). > > The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of interests it > is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those interests. > So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might be a very > effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder > farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is in many > instances a very open question subject to for example, the personailities of > individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political > interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former > affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such processes > could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the > term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. > > I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi-stakeholder > governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to contribute > to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative would still > leave open the question of overall democractic governance and accountability > of the Internet. > > Best, > > Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Oct 1 10:36:48 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 10:36:48 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> Message-ID: <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self-appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative democracy in the 18th and 19th century. Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started that rethinking process… In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Principles Interesting and important. My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand.” There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is not defined. So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many others too. “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people governs. But how? The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially the National Election Committee – is controlled by government appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are central? It is on this background that I well understand the short statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? Norbert Klein Phnom Penh/Cambodia = On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: Wolfgang and all, I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a series of multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in several African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons which I won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective as an inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far from what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, as in some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the notions of management with democracy). The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of interests it is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those interests. So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might be a very effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is in many instances a very open question subject to for example, the personailities of individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to contribute to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative would still leave open the question of overall democractic governance and accountability of the Internet. Best, Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Mon Oct 1 10:55:54 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 16:55:54 +0200 (CEST) Subject: AW: [governance] Principles Message-ID: <1107491249.20788.1349103354683.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g18> Hallo Wolfgang Of course I'd prefer to exchange with you about such "senitive" issues in our common language, I mean german. But unfortunately we can't on this list ... I know -and I understand- how your background is modelled by your personal experience. However, the thematics we are dealing with here are in a much different environment. In the ICT domain there are not any longer two "empires" that try to share the (ICT-)pie, but rather a unique one that firmly intends to get almost all of it ! That justifies some major points Parminder is regularly and correctly raising on the list. Let's look at your arguments for assessing that MSHism IS "the highest form of participatory democracy" because it "offers an option to bring all parties on a equal footing into the process of a PDP". On an equal footing ? Do you feel on equal footing with Eric Schmitt (Google) or even Mark Zuckerberg" (Facebook), just to take two simple examples ? Unless you you are presumptuus or irrealistic, dear Wolfgang, this isn't the case. May be I'm wrong, but it's up to you to proove it to us. For staying in Europe, are you aware of the capacity of influence of the 2000 or so "agreed lobbyists" in Brussels and did you weigh it against that of the hundred or so NGOs ? Just look the result in the REACH Directive of the Commission ! Whereas I agree (end of second alinea) that "a intergovernmental treaty system needs additional (external) checks and balances" I'm rather sceptical about the fact that checks and balances have " today be embedded into a multistakeholder environment". Such an "embedded MSHism" is likely to be ineffective as the lamentable failure of the Rio+20 Summit demonstrates, despite a long multistakeholder based preparation ! However, I agree with the usefulness of a discussion about the meaning of national (and regional as for Europe) sovereignty in a globalized world, except that in my mind -and for the sake of Humanity- this world shouldn't be "Internet based" but, let's say, Internet benefitting or Internet-aided. If CS is to defend something in the actual world it IS a common set of values agreed upon. Finally I also agree with your proposal (last alinea) to start a discussion -in my opinion an in-depth discussion- on "how to enhance our understanding of sovereingty and self-determination", and "How a shared sovereignty (some people call it "collaborative sovereignty") could look like". But I'd suggest this dicussion to permanently keep in mind the fundamentals of representative democracy, unless it will encompass risks for democracy itself to regress ! I thank you, Wolfgang, for your understanding Best greetings to you and to the members of the list Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 01/10/12 11:53 > De : ""Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"" > A : "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" , governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : AW: [governance] Principles > > Hi Jean Louis, > > like always: if you try to be short your produce misunderstandings. My reference point is the "round table" philosophy we had in 1989 after the collapse of the German Democratic Repuiblic and which was - at least in my eyes - a very high form of a participatory democracy. This was killed within months by our west German brothers who said that such an involvement of all stakeholders is not needed in a representative democracy. WSIS has proofed that the involvement of non-govenrmental stakeholders, in particular civil society, in affairs which had been so far negotiated only by the representatives of governments, is not a bad idea. > > The multistakeholder model offers an option to bring all parties on a equal footing into the process of a PDP, case by case. I agree that the existing models (IGF, ICANN) are far away from the ideal, but they are first steps into the right direction. The alternative - back to the intergovernmental treaty system - would be in my eyes a step backwards. This is not an argument against the intergovernmental treaty system (where needed), we need international law and the Charter of the United Nations with its jus cogens principles is a good document. But I see that such a intergovernmental treaty system needs additional (external) checks and balances and has today be embedded into a multistakeholder environment. The WGIG definition speaks about "shared decision making procedures". At the end this will lead us to a discussion about the meaing of national (governmental) sovereignty in a globalised Internet based world. > > It would make sense to start a discussion how to enhance our understanding of "sovereingty" and "self-determination" (two jus cogens principles from the UN Charter) in the Internet age. How a "shared sovereignty" (some people call it "collaborative sovereignty") could look like? Is this only for governments or should civil society and other Non-governmental stakeholders be part of this enhanced understanding of sovereignty? > > Wolfgang > > > ________________________________ > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Oct 1 10:59:59 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 14:59:59 +0000 Subject: [governance] Google's officer with detention order in brasil In-Reply-To: <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223FF98@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Parminder, In my opinion your responses and statements continue to take the form of crude leftist propaganda rather than real dialogue. But I understand that you, like most propagandists, get a lot of mileage out of simply repeating the same message over and over again until people grow weary of responding. So I will make some perfunctory efforts to respond just to demonstrate that most of us are not intimidated by aggressive repetition of invalid arguments. They should use democratic processes, and if the processes are not fine, fight to have the right processes. MM: So you are proposing that people meekly comply with such crude interventions until such time as legislatures change, judges change, etc.? I on the other hand would support the right of people to exercise internationally guaranteed free expression rights in defiance of any government. Putin was elected in Russia, Hugo Chavez was "elected" in Venezuela, I supposed they must be obeyed in your calculation? And you speak of struggles for democracy! This is the history of struggles for democracy, which continue, although a new neoliberal discourse has been trying to confuse them through concepts like users rights (whats wrong with people's rights!), multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy), internet exceptionalism and so on. MM: You are stuck in a 19th century mindset involving the territorial nation-state with elected officials as the ultimate and only form of democracy. It is unfortunate that your thinking has not progressed. And by the way, all successful and progressive democracies are in fact liberal democracies, so it is not democracy per se that is of value, but democracy as one element of a political system that safeguards individual human rights. You of course realise that US gov has full authority over its own digital space, and considerable authority over that of other countries. Thus it may be more useful to direct civil society fire power where the illegitimate concentration of power lies. MM: I have directed and am directing considerable firepower at USG exercises of national power over cyberspace, as you well know. And there are many advocates of US power who believe that it does NOT have sufficient authority over its own digital space. I guess you haven't been paying attention to the cybersecurity legislation debates in the US. I have failed to see any proposals from you for framing global laws for, what we both agree is and should be preserved as a, global Internet. MM: Then you are simply ignorant, and need to do your reading. Challenging application of national laws on the Internet in developing countries (the fact of a particular law being bad is a very different issues and should be dealt by democratic and civil society processes) and instead advocating application of US globally does not make for a very convincing case. MM: I favor globalized and networked institutions for setting policy and, more important, minimal coercive interventions regardless of where they come from. As you well know. So nice try, but I don't think your attempt to exploit anti-US populism really works in my case. On the other hand, it is clear from your comments above that you do NOT support international laws guaranteeing freedom of expression "regardless of frontiers." In this case, you want national laws applied regardless of their impact on freedom of information. Your political appeals are based on a crude anti-business agenda, not on an Internet freedom agenda. "Big business is bad " is a nice simple slogan, and many people will respond to it, and it can get lots of folks elected to local political office. But let's keep in mind the basic facts of the situation we are debating. What was the "crime" here? It was: not taking down a video criticizing a politician within 24 hours. Can you tell me how the public was harmed by this? Do you view this as a gigantic violation of public interest? You are really quite comical. At least the communists and socialists of the 1920s were dealing with life-and-death issues in regard to their critique of business. If you are going to wage an international war against the depredations of big business, you had better come up with something more substantive than Google's terms of use applied to people getting free service, or its resistance to silly and obstructive local laws regarding video takedowns. And we all know that if Google took down videos arbitrarily, you would be criticizing them for that, as well. It's very clear where your simple-minded politics are coming from. On the other hand, I do understand that in the new neoliberal global world order, their is this new political direction of richer classes in most countries (especially, but not only, developing countries) to seek to opt out of the democratic order they are 'subject to' in favour of a new post-democratic global order whose political capital lies in the US, because whether they like it or not, any new system still needs some kind of political coercive authority, for instance to make those early dawn knocks to catch people doing things as dangerous as sharing video files. Again, there is no coherent political or legal argument here, there is simply 1970s-vintage foaming at the mouth against "US imperialism". Should the world ever be unfortunate enough to put you and your ideas in a position of power and responsibility, you will soon learn - as did all the 'anti-imperialist' socialist dictatorships and economic failures in the developing world of the 1970s - that simply being against the US does not produce anything of value for subject populations. You have to have a substantive agenda. you have said that US laws and judges are good and should continue to overlord over the ICANN (for whatever 'minimalist' areas that you lay down). Another crude distortion. We have had a debate about California nonprofit incorporation law. ICANN has to incorporate somewhere, and I have said that in terms of public accountability, which you claim to support, that California law is as good as any, and that it is BETTER than international organization laws, which immunize organizations from all kinds of things. You are basically claiming that a treaty can be devised that is better, but no such treaty exists! And given the realities of inter-state political bargaining, there is very little likelihood that the outcome of a treaty process would be better. You have lost this argument, obviously, so your only recourse is to return to your anti-US mantra and claim that I support US as "overlord." I think most people can see through this. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Oct 1 12:55:04 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:55:04 +0200 Subject: [governance] UNDESA References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223FF98@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3D5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Does he have the IGF and Internet Governance on his agenda? http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/newsletter/desanews/feature/2012/10/index.html#4994 wolfgang -------------- 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Mon Oct 1 15:24:30 2012 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 15:24:30 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> How many times has this list been around this track ...? Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which democracy can be prey. And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober light - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried." By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism hold out prospect to be a replacement. That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as the starting point. Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. David On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I don't > have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… > > Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- > appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not > "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that > we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ > redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of > instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and > information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action at > a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the > technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be > completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative > democracy in the 18th and 19th century. > > Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the > tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of > accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and > increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, collective, > associative) and a wide range of others need to be accounted for and > I think "we" as a species have only just started that rethinking > process… > > In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and understand > and have some experience with for leaps in the dark seems to me to > be a not very useful place to begin. > > M > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > ] On Behalf Of Norbert Klein > Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > > Interesting and important. > My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such > processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any > definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would > understand.” > There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is > not defined. > So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) > one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. > This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for > example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected it. > Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists (the > “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German National > People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 – > starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many > others too. > “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people governs. > But how? > The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the > National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN Special > Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has raised > serious concerns because the electoral system – especially the > National Election Committee – is controlled by government > appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the > National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people forcefully > evicted from their traditional areas of residency have not only lost > their homes, but they are no longer on residency related voter lists. > Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level – more democratic, > where 14 million Cambodia have the same vote-weight as 235+ million > of Indonesia? > The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual > situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the > good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the > people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering at > the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are central? > It is on this background that I well understand the short statement > (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet Governance: > “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy” > If it is not – so what else, and how? > > Norbert Klein > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > = > > On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > Wolfgang and all, > > I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a > series of > multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in > several > African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons > which I > won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... > > However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while > `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective > as an > inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far > from > what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, > as in > some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the > notions > of management with democracy). > > The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of > interests it > is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those > interests. > So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might > be a very > effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder > farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is > in many > instances a very open question subject to for example, the > personailities of > individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political > interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former > affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such > processes > could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition > of the > term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. > > I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- > stakeholder > governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to > contribute > to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative > would still > leave open the question of overall democractic governance and > accountability > of the Internet. > > Best, > > Mike > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Mon Oct 1 16:23:06 2012 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 22:23:06 +0200 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> Dear all I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular interests. By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to participate without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, cannot be resolved by rough consensus. It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation documents to inform them better. ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David Allen. Greetings, Norbert David Allen wrote: > How many times has this list been around this track ...? > > Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which > democracy can be prey. > > And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober > light > - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of > government except all the others that have been tried." > > By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism > hold out prospect to be a replacement. > > That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may > create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best > argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the > average voter." > > What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality > thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how > representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected > world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. > Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is > now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, > because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power > in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as > the starting point. > > Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile > - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. > > As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. > > David > > On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > > > Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I > > don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… > > > > Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- > > appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not > > "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that > > we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ > > redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of > > instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and > > information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action > > at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the > > technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be > > completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative > > democracy in the 18th and 19th century. > > > > Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the > > tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of > > accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and > > increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, > > collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be > > accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started > > that rethinking process… > > > > In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and > > understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark > > seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. > > > > M > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of > > Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > > > > Interesting and important. > > My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such > > processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within > > any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) > > would understand.” > > There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is > > not defined. > > So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) > > one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. > > This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for > > example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected > > it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists > > (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German > > National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 > > – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many > > others too. > > “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people > > governs. But how? > > The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the > > National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN > > Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has > > raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially > > the National Election Committee – is controlled by government > > appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the > > National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people > > forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have > > not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency > > related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level > > – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same > > vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? > > The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual > > situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the > > good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the > > people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering > > at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are > > central? It is on this background that I well understand the short > > statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet > > Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of > > participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? > > > > Norbert Klein > > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > > > = > > > > On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > Wolfgang and all, > > > > I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a > > series of > > multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in > > several > > African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons > > which I > > won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... > > > > However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while > > `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very > > effective as an > > inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very > > far from > > what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` > > (unless, as in > > some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate > > the notions > > of management with democracy). > > > > The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of > > interests it > > is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those > > interests. > > So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might > > be a very > > effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small > > holder farmers the precise process of accountability and > > representivity is in many > > instances a very open question subject to for example, the > > personailities of > > individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political > > interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former > > affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such > > processes > > could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any > > definition of the > > term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. > > > > I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- > > stakeholder > > governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to > > contribute > > to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative > > would still > > leave open the question of overall democractic governance and > > accountability > > of the Internet. > > > > Best, > > > > Mike -------------- 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 From matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at Mon Oct 1 16:48:56 2012 From: matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at (Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann@uni-graz.at)) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 22:48:56 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: Dear all though I enjoy this discussion I think there are two underlying problems. 1) Most notions of democracy used in this (and a lot of other) debate(s) are state-centred. They are no longer tenable as a legitimating basis for the production of rules in transnational constellations. To ensure that they are legitimate, we need a new concept of democrac. 2) Discussants often mix up two different notions of democracy: the formal and the material one. Formally, democracy demands that each vote be counted. But that's not enough. Over the years there has been developed an international cumstomary law basis of what democracy materially truly means - human rights-based, accountable government (and good governance) based on real, periodic, secret elections. What does this mean for our debate? We need to focus not on democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a goal. How does this work? First of all, we need to look at the material, not the formal, notion of democracy. We need to ensure that the rules we aim for are materially reflective of the needs of those to whom they are applied. Second, 'one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan, but it's just no enough in our post-national constellation. We have to think about how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the process of producing norms. Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is a new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national constellations. Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the individual’s central needs (and thus have high output legitimacy). This is one of the points I'm making in the published version of my PhD which Eleven International will publish in autumn. So less talk about democracy, and more talk about legitimacy. Kind regards Matthias -- Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard) Institute of International Law and International Relations University of Graz E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at Blog | internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com ________________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] Gesendet: Montag, 01. Oktober 2012 22:23 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles Dear all I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular interests. By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to participate without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, cannot be resolved by rough consensus. It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation documents to inform them better. ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David Allen. Greetings, Norbert David Allen wrote: > How many times has this list been around this track ...? > > Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which > democracy can be prey. > > And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober > light > - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of > government except all the others that have been tried." > > By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism > hold out prospect to be a replacement. > > That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may > create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best > argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the > average voter." > > What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality > thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how > representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected > world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. > Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is > now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, > because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power > in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as > the starting point. > > Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile > - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. > > As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. > > David > > On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > > > Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I > > don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… > > > > Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- > > appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not > > "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that > > we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ > > redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of > > instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and > > information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action > > at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the > > technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be > > completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative > > democracy in the 18th and 19th century. > > > > Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the > > tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of > > accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and > > increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, > > collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be > > accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started > > that rethinking process… > > > > In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and > > understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark > > seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. > > > > M > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of > > Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > > > > Interesting and important. > > My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such > > processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within > > any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) > > would understand.” > > There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is > > not defined. > > So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) > > one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. > > This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for > > example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected > > it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists > > (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German > > National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 > > – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many > > others too. > > “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people > > governs. But how? > > The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the > > National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN > > Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has > > raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially > > the National Election Committee – is controlled by government > > appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the > > National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people > > forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have > > not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency > > related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level > > – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same > > vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? > > The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual > > situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the > > good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the > > people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering > > at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are > > central? It is on this background that I well understand the short > > statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet > > Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of > > participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? > > > > Norbert Klein > > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > > > = > > > > On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > Wolfgang and all, > > > > I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a > > series of > > multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in > > several > > African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons > > which I > > won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... > > > > However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while > > `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very > > effective as an > > inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very > > far from > > what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` > > (unless, as in > > some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate > > the notions > > of management with democracy). > > > > The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of > > interests it > > is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those > > interests. > > So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might > > be a very > > effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small > > holder farmers the precise process of accountability and > > representivity is in many > > instances a very open question subject to for example, the > > personailities of > > individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political > > interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former > > affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such > > processes > > could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any > > definition of the > > term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. > > > > I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- > > stakeholder > > governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to > > contribute > > to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative > > would still > > leave open the question of overall democractic governance and > > accountability > > of the Internet. > > > > Best, > > > > Mike -------------- 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Mon Oct 1 17:35:29 2012 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 17:35:29 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> hmmm ... > We have to think about how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the > sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be > conveyed in the process of producing norms. and > ... in post-democratic trans-national constellations ... So, we _presume_ a post-democratic order - so that we can legitimize something besides 'democracy'? I don't think so. Such logic is circular. And: > We need to focus not on democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a > goal. As Norbert has pointed out, the Nazi's were legitimate - to use the case, which is cited now, all over the web, ad nauseam. To go beyond that case, Stalin still has many, many adherents in Russia. A man who saw to the slaughter of millions and millions. I can come up with some heinous American examples, I am sure, with only a little effort. How about the Ku Klux Klan, who just for instance ruled the US state of Indiana (where I am a native) through at least the 1930s? And of course saw to lynchings, and all manner of the ugliest and most despicable acts. They had legitimacy. Legitimacy, as the target? I don't think so. On the other hand: > human rights-based, accountable government (and good governance) > based on real, periodic, secret elections. > We need to ensure that the rules we aim for are materially > reflective of the needs of those to whom they are applied. These could be first elements in a potentially productive discussion, to address the serious problems of greater scale and so complexity. _If_ they do not presume answers, but instead are in a spirit of real investigation. For instance: > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > individual’s central needs ... While counter cases simply abound - and so invalidate the proposition - at the same time there are successful, working instances which could be useful in thinking about possibilities, going forward. Once again, only if in a spirit of investigation, oh so early on in the process, without presumption of conclusions (which is the bane of successful intellectual work ... which dooms any such effort before it is begun). Certainly though, any useful discussion will begin and end with the interplay of power relations. As I memorably heard Kenneth Arrow say, oh so many years ago, (of course the Kenneth Arrow of last century's mathematical neoclassical microeconomics, perhaps the first Economics Nobel, certainly one of the first): After he had spent an hour explaining the calculus of perfect competition, he turned and said (words to the effect): Or maybe, this result is rendered immaterial by the ability of two men to overpower one person. Democracy is about the little person retaining power, even in the face of power accumulations, be that by economic forces such as corporate behemoths who disenfranchise the little guy, or by autocrats bent on taking from their populace for their own benefit. Notwithstanding, with the greatest respect for a thesis about to be published. David On Oct 1, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at ) wrote: > Dear all > > though I enjoy this discussion I think there are two underlying > problems. 1) Most notions of democracy used in this (and a lot of > other) debate(s) are state-centred. They are no longer tenable as a > legitimating basis for the production of rules in transnational > constellations. To ensure that they are legitimate, we need a new > concept of democrac. 2) Discussants often mix up two different > notions of democracy: the formal and the material one. Formally, > democracy demands that each vote be counted. But that's not enough. > Over the years there has been developed an international cumstomary > law basis of what democracy materially truly means - human rights- > based, accountable government (and good governance) based on real, > periodic, secret elections. > > What does this mean for our debate? We need to focus not on > democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a goal. > > How does this work? First of all, we need to look at the material, > not the formal, notion of democracy. We need to ensure that the > rules we aim for are materially reflective of the needs of those to > whom they are applied. > > Second, 'one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan, but it's just no > enough in our post-national constellation. We have to think about > how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation > state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the > process of producing norms. > > Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need > to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This > process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But > multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is > a new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national > constellations. > > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > individual’s central needs (and thus have high output legitimacy). > > This is one of the points I'm making in the published version of my > PhD which Eleven International will publish in autumn. > > So less talk about democracy, and more talk about legitimacy. > > Kind regards > > Matthias > > -- > Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard) > Institute of International Law and International Relations > University of Graz > E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at > Blog | internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com > ________________________________________ > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > ] im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] > Gesendet: Montag, 01. Oktober 2012 22:23 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles > > Dear all > > I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism > *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". > > I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the > public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular > interests. > > By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to > participate > without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate > processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to > significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, cannot be > resolved by rough consensus. > > It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have > imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all > bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution > strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of > governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make > Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. > As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a > multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation > documents to inform them better. > ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) > > But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in > itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. > > Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David > Allen. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > David Allen wrote: > >> How many times has this list been around this track ...? >> >> Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which >> democracy can be prey. >> >> And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober >> light >> - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of >> government except all the others that have been tried." >> >> By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism >> hold out prospect to be a replacement. >> >> That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may >> create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best >> argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the >> average voter." >> >> What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality >> thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how >> representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected >> world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. >> Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is >> now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, >> because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power >> in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as >> the starting point. >> >> Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile >> - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. >> >> As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. >> >> David >> >> On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >>> Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I >>> don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… >>> >>> Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- >>> appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not >>> "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that >>> we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ >>> redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of >>> instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and >>> information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action >>> at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the >>> technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be >>> completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative >>> democracy in the 18th and 19th century. >>> >>> Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the >>> tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of >>> accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and >>> increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, >>> collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be >>> accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started >>> that rethinking process… >>> >>> In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and >>> understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark >>> seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. >>> >>> M >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >>> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of >>> Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles >>> >>> Interesting and important. >>> My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such >>> processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within >>> any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) >>> would understand.” >>> There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is >>> not defined. >>> So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) >>> one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. >>> This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for >>> example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected >>> it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists >>> (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German >>> National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 >>> – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many >>> others too. >>> “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people >>> governs. But how? >>> The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the >>> National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN >>> Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has >>> raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially >>> the National Election Committee – is controlled by government >>> appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the >>> National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people >>> forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have >>> not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency >>> related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level >>> – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same >>> vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? >>> The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual >>> situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the >>> good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the >>> people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering >>> at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are >>> central? It is on this background that I well understand the short >>> statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet >>> Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of >>> participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? >>> >>> Norbert Klein >>> Phnom Penh/Cambodia >>> >>> = >>> >>> On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> Wolfgang and all, >>> >>> I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a >>> series of >>> multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in >>> several >>> African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons >>> which I >>> won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... >>> >>> However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while >>> `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very >>> effective as an >>> inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very >>> far from >>> what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` >>> (unless, as in >>> some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate >>> the notions >>> of management with democracy). >>> >>> The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of >>> interests it >>> is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those >>> interests. >>> So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might >>> be a very >>> effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small >>> holder farmers the precise process of accountability and >>> representivity is in many >>> instances a very open question subject to for example, the >>> personailities of >>> individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political >>> interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former >>> affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such >>> processes >>> could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any >>> definition of the >>> term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. >>> >>> I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- >>> stakeholder >>> governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to >>> contribute >>> to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative >>> would still >>> leave open the question of overall democractic governance and >>> accountability >>> of the Internet. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Mike > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Oct 1 18:07:19 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 18:07:19 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <02e801cda021$20e1db50$62a591f0$@gmail.com> A few questions/comments Matthias... -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at) Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 4:49 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow Subject: AW: [governance] Principles Dear all though I enjoy this discussion I think there are two underlying problems. 1) Most notions of democracy used in this (and a lot of other) debate(s) are state-centred. They are no longer tenable as a legitimating basis for the production of rules in transnational constellations. [MG>] Who says and why should we accept your or anyone's assertion that "they are no longer tenable... This seems to be a very presumptuous position especially since it is asserted not argued for... To ensure that they are legitimate, we need a new concept of democrac. [MG>] Again, who says so and why should I or anyone take this opinion as fact... 2) Discussants often mix up two different notions of democracy: the formal and the material one. Formally, democracy demands that each vote be counted. But that's not enough. Over the years there has been developed an international cumstomary law basis of what democracy materially truly means - human rights-based, accountable government (and good governance) based on real, periodic, secret elections. [MG>] This seems to me to be confused/confusing although it may just be linguistic difficulties... It seems to me that "democracy" rather goes beyond "demanding" that each vote be counted to ensuring some degree and means of control over the governors by the governed... having each vote be counted is necessary for this but certainly not sufficient... Your assertion concerning the difference between a "formal" definition and a "material" definition seems to me to include a very high degree of overlap (viz. real, periodic, secret elections which you asserted as being the very essence of the "formal" defintion... What does this mean for our debate? We need to focus not on democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a goal. [MG>] I really have no idea what this means. I'm not sure who if anyone has (or would) simply focus on "democracy as a concept"... democracy is most certainly a concept but as such it needs to be unpacked, translated, given "materiality"... Apart from straw men, I would assume that anyone discussing this here would move into this realm and beyond simply "democracy as a concept"... How does this work? First of all, we need to look at the material, not the formal, notion of democracy. We need to ensure that the rules we aim for are materially reflective of the needs of those to whom they are applied. [MG>] Yes, see above... So what... Second, 'one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan, but it's just no enough in our post-national constellation. We have to think about how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the process of producing norms. [MG>] Again a straw person argument... ('one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan')... and again I have no idea what this (following) could mean. "how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the process of producing norms." Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is a new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national constellations. [MG>] Legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder(s)... One man's legitimacy is another person's bastard child.... I agree that "multistakeholderism is (an attempt) at a new form of conveying legitimacy etc.etc." how successful that attempt is, is I think the subject of this discussion... Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the individual's central needs (and thus have high output legitimacy). [MG>] Again, I have no idea what this means... This is one of the points I'm making in the published version of my PhD which Eleven International will publish in autumn. So less talk about democracy, and more talk about legitimacy. [MG>] I think we need to talk about both and recognize that both terms are subject to a wide range of interpretations/evaluations and to a considerable degree are in some state of (technologically induced) transition to an end point which is as yet unclear. Best, M Kind regards Matthias -- Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard) Institute of International Law and International Relations University of Graz E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at Blog | internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com ________________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] Gesendet: Montag, 01. Oktober 2012 22:23 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles Dear all I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular interests. By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to participate without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, cannot be resolved by rough consensus. It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation documents to inform them better. ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David Allen. Greetings, Norbert David Allen < David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu> wrote: > How many times has this list been around this track ...? > > Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which > democracy can be prey. > > And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober light > - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of > government except all the others that have been tried." > > By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism > hold out prospect to be a replacement. > > That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may > create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best > argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the > average voter." > > What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality thinking > and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how > representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected > world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. > Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is > now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, > because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power in > individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as the > starting point. > > Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile > - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. > > As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. > > David > > On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > > > Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I don't > > have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else. > > > > Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- > > appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not > > "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that > > we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ > > redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of > > instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and > > information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action at > > a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the > > technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be > > completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative > > democracy in the 18th and 19th century. > > > > Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the > > tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of > > accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and > > increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, collective, > > associative) and a wide range of others need to be accounted for and > > I think "we" as a species have only just started that rethinking > > process. > > > > In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and understand > > and have some experience with for leaps in the dark seems to me to > > be a not very useful place to begin. > > > > M > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of Norbert > > Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > > > > Interesting and important. > > My question relates to this part: "the degree to which such > > processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any > > definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would > > understand." > > There is an assumption what "most of us" would expect - but it is > > not defined. > > So I assume - maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of "one man (or woman) > > one vote"? If not - so what? Please elaborate. > > This surely was a good principle - it was used a lot arguing, for > > example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected > > it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists (the > > "Nationalsozialisten" = Nazi"), with the help of the German National > > People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 - > > starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many > > others too. > > "Demo-cracy" hints at a concept that the will of the people governs. > > But how? > > The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the > > National Assembly through every vote since 1993 - but the UN Special > > Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has raised > > serious concerns because the electoral system - especially the > > National Election Committee - is controlled by government > > appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the > > National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people forcefully > > evicted from their traditional areas of residency have not only lost > > their homes, but they are no longer on residency related voter > > lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level - more > > democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same vote-weight as > > 235+ million of Indonesia? > > The question is not only: What is democratic? - In the actual > > situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the > > good goal that "the people's" benefits (not the majority of the > > people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering at > > the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are central? > > It is on this background that I well understand the short statement > > (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet > > Governance: "Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of > > participatory democracy" If it is not - so what else, and how? > > > > Norbert Klein > > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > > > = > > > > On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > Wolfgang and all, > > > > I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a > > series of multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture > > planning) in several African countries... I was quite impressed for > > a number of reasons which I won`t go into here (I`m currently > > working on the report... > > > > However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while > > `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective > > as an inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is > > very far from what I, or I think almost anyone would call > > ``democratic`` (unless, as in some I think, quite perverse > > instances, one chooses to conflate the notions of management with > > democracy). > > > > The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of > > interests it is not necessarily accountable or representative of or > > for those interests. > > So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might > > be a very effective stakeholder representative of the interests of > > small holder farmers the precise process of accountability and > > representivity is in many instances a very open question subject to > > for example, the personailities of individuals, literacy, access to > > media and information, political interference etc. etc. The latter > > caveats do not preclude the former affirmations but they do strongly > > bracket the degree to which such processes could at all be called > > ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or > > I would expect most of us) would understand. > > > > I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- > > stakeholder governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I > > hope to contribute to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of > > that initiative would still leave open the question of overall > > democractic governance and accountability of the Internet. > > > > Best, > > > > Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Mon Oct 1 18:10:40 2012 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 18:10:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> Message-ID: <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com> Dear All -- This discussion really can't be serious. It opens up an incredible can of worms and seems to be posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 previous years of political philosophy and history. The nation state is going to be with us for the foreseeable future (that is to say, our lifetimes) as the source and locus of law and power. The Internet has not put an end to the nation state, much as some people on this list would like to believe. Try telling a traffic policeman that he can't arrest you because you're not a citizen but a netizen, and see where you end up. Cheers, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: David Allen To: governance Sent: Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [governance] Principles hmmm ... > We have to think about how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the > sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be > conveyed in the process of producing norms. and > ... in post-democratic trans-national constellations ... So, we _presume_ a post-democratic order - so that we can legitimize something besides 'democracy'? I don't think so. Such logic is circular. And: > We need to focus not on democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a > goal. As Norbert has pointed out, the Nazi's were legitimate - to use the case, which is cited now, all over the web, ad nauseam. To go beyond that case, Stalin still has many, many adherents in Russia. A man who saw to the slaughter of millions and millions. I can come up with some heinous American examples, I am sure, with only a little effort. How about the Ku Klux Klan, who just for instance ruled the US state of Indiana (where I am a native) through at least the 1930s? And of course saw to lynchings, and all manner of the ugliest and most despicable acts. They had legitimacy. Legitimacy, as the target? I don't think so. On the other hand: > human rights-based, accountable government (and good governance) > based on real, periodic, secret elections. > We need to ensure that the rules we aim for are materially > reflective of the needs of those to whom they are applied. These could be first elements in a potentially productive discussion, to address the serious problems of greater scale and so complexity. _If_ they do not presume answers, but instead are in a spirit of real investigation. For instance: > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > individual’s central needs ... While counter cases simply abound - and so invalidate the proposition - at the same time there are successful, working instances which could be useful in thinking about possibilities, going forward. Once again, only if in a spirit of investigation, oh so early on in the process, without presumption of conclusions (which is the bane of successful intellectual work ... which dooms any such effort before it is begun). Certainly though, any useful discussion will begin and end with the interplay of power relations. As I memorably heard Kenneth Arrow say, oh so many years ago, (of course the Kenneth Arrow of last century's mathematical neoclassical microeconomics, perhaps the first Economics Nobel, certainly one of the first): After he had spent an hour explaining the calculus of perfect competition, he turned and said (words to the effect): Or maybe, this result is rendered immaterial by the ability of two men to overpower one person. Democracy is about the little person retaining power, even in the face of power accumulations, be that by economic forces such as corporate behemoths who disenfranchise the little guy, or by autocrats bent on taking from their populace for their own benefit. Notwithstanding, with the greatest respect for a thesis about to be published. David On Oct 1, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at ) wrote: > Dear all > > though I enjoy this discussion I think there are two underlying > problems. 1) Most notions of democracy used in this (and a lot of > other) debate(s) are state-centred. They are no longer tenable as a > legitimating basis for the production of rules in transnational > constellations. To ensure that they are legitimate, we need a new > concept of democrac. 2) Discussants often mix up two different > notions of democracy: the formal and the material one. Formally, > democracy demands that each vote be counted. But that's not enough. > Over the years there has been developed an international cumstomary > law basis of what democracy materially truly means - human rights- > based, accountable government (and good governance) based on real, > periodic, secret elections. > > What does this mean for our debate? We need to focus not on > democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a goal. > > How does this work? First of all, we need to look at the material, > not the formal, notion of democracy. We need to ensure that the > rules we aim for are materially reflective of the needs of those to > whom they are applied. > > Second, 'one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan, but it's just no > enough in our post-national constellation. We have to think about > how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation > state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the > process of producing norms. > > Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need > to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This > process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But > multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is > a new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national > constellations. > > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > individual’s central needs (and thus have high output legitimacy). > > This is one of the points I'm making in the published version of my > PhD which Eleven International will publish in autumn. > > So less talk about democracy, and more talk about legitimacy. > > Kind regards > > Matthias > > -- > Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard) > Institute of International Law and International Relations > University of Graz > E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at > Blog | internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com > ________________________________________ > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > ] im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] > Gesendet: Montag, 01. Oktober 2012 22:23 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles > > Dear all > > I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism > *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". > > I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the > public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular > interests. > > By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to > participate > without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate > processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to > significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, cannot be > resolved by rough consensus. > > It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have > imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all > bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution > strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of > governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make > Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. > As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a > multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation > documents to inform them better. > ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) > > But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in > itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. > > Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David > Allen. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > David Allen wrote: > >> How many times has this list been around this track ...? >> >> Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which >> democracy can be prey. >> >> And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober >> light >> - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of >> government except all the others that have been tried." >> >> By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism >> hold out prospect to be a replacement. >> >> That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may >> create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best >> argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the >> average voter." >> >> What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality >> thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how >> representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected >> world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. >> Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is >> now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, >> because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power >> in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as >> the starting point. >> >> Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile >> - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. >> >> As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. >> >> David >> >> On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >>> Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I >>> don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… >>> >>> Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- >>> appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not >>> "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that >>> we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ >>> redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of >>> instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and >>> information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action >>> at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the >>> technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be >>> completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative >>> democracy in the 18th and 19th century. >>> >>> Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the >>> tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of >>> accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and >>> increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, >>> collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be >>> accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started >>> that rethinking process… >>> >>> In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and >>> understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark >>> seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. >>> >>> M >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >>> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of >>> Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles >>> >>> Interesting and important. >>> My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such >>> processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within >>> any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) >>> would understand.” >>> There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is >>> not defined. >>> So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) >>> one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. >>> This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for >>> example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected >>> it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists >>> (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German >>> National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 >>> – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many >>> others too. >>> “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people >>> governs. But how? >>> The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the >>> National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN >>> Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has >>> raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially >>> the National Election Committee – is controlled by government >>> appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the >>> National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people >>> forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have >>> not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency >>> related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level >>> – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same >>> vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? >>> The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual >>> situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the >>> good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the >>> people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering >>> at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are >>> central? It is on this background that I well understand the short >>> statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet >>> Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of >>> participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? >>> >>> Norbert Klein >>> Phnom Penh/Cambodia >>> >>> = >>> >>> On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> Wolfgang and all, >>> >>> I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a >>> series of >>> multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in >>> several >>> African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons >>> which I >>> won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... >>> >>> However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while >>> `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very >>> effective as an >>> inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very >>> far from >>> what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` >>> (unless, as in >>> some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate >>> the notions >>> of management with democracy). >>> >>> The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of >>> interests it >>> is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those >>> interests. >>> So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might >>> be a very >>> effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small >>> holder farmers the precise process of accountability and >>> representivity is in many >>> instances a very open question subject to for example, the >>> personailities of >>> individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political >>> interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former >>> affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such >>> processes >>> could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any >>> definition of the >>> term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. >>> >>> I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- >>> stakeholder >>> governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to >>> contribute >>> to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative >>> would still >>> leave open the question of overall democractic governance and >>> accountability >>> of the Internet. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Mike > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Mon Oct 1 19:01:53 2012 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 19:01:53 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com > Message-ID: <3B8ABC10-F3A9-4DDF-8567-B897D4CA936C@post.harvard.edu> On Oct 1, 2012, at 6:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > Dear All -- > > This discussion really can't be serious. It opens up an incredible > can of worms and seems to be posited on the notion that the Internet > has revoked the 2,500 previous years of political philosophy and > history. The nation state is going to be with us for the foreseeable > future (that is to say, our lifetimes) as the source and locus of > law and power. The Internet has not put an end to the nation state, > much as some people on this list would like to believe. Amen. > Try telling a traffic policeman that he can't arrest you because > you're not a citizen but a netizen, and see where you end up. - ! - > Cheers, Rony Koven Cheers, indeed! David > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Allen > To: governance > Sent: Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:41 pm > Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > > hmmm ... > > > We have to think about how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the > > sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be > > conveyed in the process of producing norms. > > and > > ... in post-democratic trans-national constellations ... > > So, we _presume_ a post-democratic order - so that we can legitimize > something besides 'democracy'? > > I don't think so. Such logic is circular. > > And: > > > We need to focus not on democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a > > goal. > > > As Norbert has pointed out, the Nazi's were legitimate - to use the > case, which is cited now, all over the web, ad nauseam. To go beyond > that case, Stalin still has many, many adherents in Russia. A man who > saw to the slaughter of millions and millions. I can come up with > some heinous American examples, I am sure, with only a little effort. > How about the Ku Klux Klan, who just for instance ruled the US state > of Indiana (where I am a native) through at least the 1930s? And of > course saw to lynchings, and all manner of the ugliest and most > despicable acts. They had legitimacy. > > Legitimacy, as the target? I don't think so. > > On the other hand: > > > human rights-based, accountable government (and good governance) > > based on real, periodic, secret elections. > > > > > We need to ensure that the rules we aim for are materially > > reflective of the needs of those to whom they are applied. > > These could be first elements in a potentially productive discussion, > to address the serious problems of greater scale and so complexity. > > _If_ they do not presume answers, but instead are in a spirit of real > investigation. > > For instance: > > > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > > individual’s central needs ... > > While counter cases simply abound - and so invalidate the proposition > - at the same time there are successful, working instances which could > be useful in thinking about possibilities, going forward. > > Once again, only if in a spirit of investigation, oh so early on in > the process, without presumption of conclusions (which is the bane of > successful intellectual work ... which dooms any such effort before it > is begun). > > > Certainly though, any useful discussion will begin and end with the > interplay of power relations. As I memorably heard Kenneth Arrow say, > oh so many years ago, (of course the Kenneth Arrow of last century's > mathematical neoclassical microeconomics, perhaps the first Economics > Nobel, certainly one of the first): After he had spent an hour > explaining the calculus of perfect competition, he turned and said > (words to the effect): Or maybe, this result is rendered immaterial > by the ability of two men to overpower one person. > > Democracy is about the little person retaining power, even in the face > of power accumulations, be that by economic forces such as corporate > behemoths who disenfranchise the little guy, or by autocrats bent on > taking from their populace for their own benefit. > > > Notwithstanding, with the greatest respect for a thesis about to be > published. > > David > > On Oct 1, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at > ) wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > though I enjoy this discussion I think there are two underlying > > problems. 1) Most notions of democracy used in this (and a lot of > > other) debate(s) are state-centred. They are no longer tenable as a > > legitimating basis for the production of rules in transnational > > constellations. To ensure that they are legitimate, we need a new > > concept of democrac. 2) Discussants often mix up two different > > notions of democracy: the formal and the material one. Formally, > > democracy demands that each vote be counted. But that's not enough. > > Over the years there has been developed an international cumstomary > > law basis of what democracy materially truly means - human rights- > > based, accountable government (and good governance) based on real, > > periodic, secret elections. > > > > What does this mean for our debate? We need to focus not on > > democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a goal. > > > > How does this work? First of all, we need to look at the material, > > not the formal, notion of democracy. We need to ensure that the > > rules we aim for are materially reflective of the needs of those to > > whom they are applied. > > > > Second, 'one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan, but it's just no > > enough in our post-national constellation. We have to think about > > how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation > > state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the > > process of producing norms. > > > > Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need > > to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This > > process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But > > multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is > > a new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national > > constellations. > > > > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > > individual’s central needs (and thus have high output legitimacy). > > > > This is one of the points I'm making in the published version of my > > PhD which Eleven International will publish in autumn. > > > > So less talk about democracy, and more talk about legitimacy. > > > > Kind regards > > > > Matthias > > > > -- > > Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard) > > Institute of International Law and International Relations > > University of Graz > > E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at > > Blog | internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com > > ________________________________________ > > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > > ] im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] > > Gesendet: Montag, 01. Oktober 2012 22:23 > > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles > > > > Dear all > > > > I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism > > *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". > > > > I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the > > public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular > > interests. > > > > By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to > > participate > > without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate > > processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to > > significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, > cannot be > > resolved by rough consensus. > > > > It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have > > imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all > > bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution > > strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of > > governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make > > Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. > > As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a > > multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation > > documents to inform them better. > > ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) > > > > But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in > > itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. > > > > Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David > > Allen. > > > > Greetings, > > Norbert > > > > > > David Allen wrote: > > > >> How many times has this list been around this track ...? > >> > >> Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which > >> democracy can be prey. > >> > >> And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober > >> light > >> - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of > >> government except all the others that have been tried." > >> > >> By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi- > stakeholderism > >> hold out prospect to be a replacement. > >> > >> That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may > >> create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best > >> argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the > >> average voter." > >> > >> What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality > >> thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand > how > >> representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected > >> world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. > >> Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is > >> now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, > >> because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power > >> in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as > >> the starting point. > >> > >> Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile > >> - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. > >> > >> As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. > >> > >> David > >> > >> On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > >> > >>> Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I > >>> don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone else… > >>> > >>> Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- > >>> appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not > >>> "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that > >>> we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ > >>> redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of > >>> instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and > >>> information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action > >>> at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the > >>> technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be > >>> completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative > >>> democracy in the 18th and 19th century. > >>> > >>> Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the > >>> tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of > >>> accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and > >>> increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, > >>> collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be > >>> accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started > >>> that rethinking process… > >>> > >>> In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and > >>> understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark > >>> seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. > >>> > >>> M > >>> > >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > >>> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of > >>> Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM > >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > >>> > >>> Interesting and important. > >>> My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such > >>> processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within > >>> any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) > >>> would understand.” > >>> There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is > >>> not defined. > >>> So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) > >>> one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. > >>> This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for > >>> example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected > >>> it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists > >>> (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German > >>> National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March > 1933 > >>> – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many > >>> others too. > >>> “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people > >>> governs. But how? > >>> The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the > >>> National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN > >>> Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia > has > >>> raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially > >>> the National Election Committee – is controlled by government > >>> appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the > >>> National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people > >>> forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have > >>> not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency > >>> related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level > >>> – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same > >>> vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? > >>> The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual > >>> situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the > >>> good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the > >>> people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering > >>> at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are > >>> central? It is on this background that I well understand the short > >>> statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet > >>> Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of > >>> participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? > >>> > >>> Norbert Klein > >>> Phnom Penh/Cambodia > >>> > >>> = > >>> > >>> On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > >>> Wolfgang and all, > >>> > >>> I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a > >>> series of > >>> multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in > >>> several > >>> African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons > >>> which I > >>> won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... > >>> > >>> However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while > >>> `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very > >>> effective as an > >>> inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very > >>> far from > >>> what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` > >>> (unless, as in > >>> some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate > >>> the notions > >>> of management with democracy). > >>> > >>> The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of > >>> interests it > >>> is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those > >>> interests. > >>> So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might > >>> be a very > >>> effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small > >>> holder farmers the precise process of accountability and > >>> representivity is in many > >>> instances a very open question subject to for example, the > >>> personailities of > >>> individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political > >>> interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the > former > >>> affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such > >>> processes > >>> could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any > >>> definition of the > >>> term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. > >>> > >>> I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- > >>> stakeholder > >>> governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to > >>> contribute > >>> to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative > >>> would still > >>> leave open the question of overall democractic governance and > >>> accountability > >>> of the Internet. > >>> > >>> Best, > >>> > >>> Mike > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Mon Oct 1 19:57:43 2012 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 09:57:43 +1000 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: Rony, you are probably right as regards our lifetimes. But a quick look at human history shows us adopting increasingly larger governance models as technological advances, firstly transport, and then telecommunications, come in to play to make us more aware of people and places we would have never conceived having contact with. So, to start with a town like London, there were firstly separate boroughs, then a town with a governance structure. It later sat within a nation called England, which joined other nearby nations to form the United Kingdom. Then, in turn, the UK became part of the European Union. United States of America is another example, or Australian Federation. Of course there are many more in all parts of the world. Or consider the rise in the last century of geopolitical global alliances of various sorts. Increasingly, we are looking at larger alliances and governance structures. In this context some form of global governance is I think inevitable, and I believe the Internet will hasten its existence and lessen the resistance to such concepts. Maybe that¹s something my grandchildren will see. I hope for their sake it is, as the current nation state structure is inadequate, almost feudal by nature, and unhelpful in solving global problems, be they environmental or internet governance or whatever. We will move on, I would love to live to see that happen, but I think like you it is probably beyond our lifetimes. Ian Peter From: Koven Ronald Reply-To: , Koven Ronald Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 18:10:40 -0400 (EDT) To: , Subject: Re: [governance] Principles Dear All -- This discussion really can't be serious. It opens up an incredible can of worms and seems to be posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 previous years of political philosophy and history. The nation state is going to be with us for the foreseeable future (that is to say, our lifetimes) as the source and locus of law and power. The Internet has not put an end to the nation state, much as some people on this list would like to believe. Try telling a traffic policeman that he can't arrest you because you're not a citizen but a netizen, and see where you end up. Cheers, Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: David Allen To: governance Sent: Mon, Oct 1, 2012 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [governance] Principles hmmm ... > We have to think about how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the > sense of post-nation state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be > conveyed in the process of producing norms. and > ... in post-democratic trans-national constellations ... So, we _presume_ a post-democratic order - so that we can legitimize something besides 'democracy'? I don't think so. Such logic is circular. And: > We need to focus not on democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a > goal. As Norbert has pointed out, the Nazi's were legitimate - to use the case, which is cited now, all over the web, ad nauseam. To go beyond that case, Stalin still has many, many adherents in Russia. A man who saw to the slaughter of millions and millions. I can come up with some heinous American examples, I am sure, with only a little effort. How about the Ku Klux Klan, who just for instance ruled the US state of Indiana (where I am a native) through at least the 1930s? And of course saw to lynchings, and all manner of the ugliest and most despicable acts. They had legitimacy. Legitimacy, as the target? I don't think so. On the other hand: > human rights-based, accountable government (and good governance) > based on real, periodic, secret elections. > We need to ensure that the rules we aim for are materially > reflective of the needs of those to whom they are applied. These could be first elements in a potentially productive discussion, to address the serious problems of greater scale and so complexity. _If_ they do not presume answers, but instead are in a spirit of real investigation. For instance: > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > individual¹s central needs ... While counter cases simply abound - and so invalidate the proposition - at the same time there are successful, working instances which could be useful in thinking about possibilities, going forward. Once again, only if in a spirit of investigation, oh so early on in the process, without presumption of conclusions (which is the bane of successful intellectual work ... which dooms any such effort before it is begun). Certainly though, any useful discussion will begin and end with the interplay of power relations. As I memorably heard Kenneth Arrow say, oh so many years ago, (of course the Kenneth Arrow of last century's mathematical neoclassical microeconomics, perhaps the first Economics Nobel, certainly one of the first): After he had spent an hour explaining the calculus of perfect competition, he turned and said (words to the effect): Or maybe, this result is rendered immaterial by the ability of two men to overpower one person. Democracy is about the little person retaining power, even in the face of power accumulations, be that by economic forces such as corporate behemoths who disenfranchise the little guy, or by autocrats bent on taking from their populace for their own benefit. Notwithstanding, with the greatest respect for a thesis about to be published. David On Oct 1, 2012, at 4:48 PM, Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at ) wrote: > Dear all > > though I enjoy this discussion I think there are two underlying > problems. 1) Most notions of democracy used in this (and a lot of > other) debate(s) are state-centred. They are no longer tenable as a > legitimating basis for the production of rules in transnational > constellations. To ensure that they are legitimate, we need a new > concept of democrac. 2) Discussants often mix up two different > notions of democracy: the formal and the material one. Formally, > democracy demands that each vote be counted. But that's not enough. > Over the years there has been developed an international cumstomary > law basis of what democracy materially truly means - human rights- > based, accountable government (and good governance) based on real, > periodic, secret elections. > > What does this mean for our debate? We need to focus not on > democracy as a concept, but legitimacy as a goal. > > How does this work? First of all, we need to look at the material, > not the formal, notion of democracy. We need to ensure that the > rules we aim for are materially reflective of the needs of those to > whom they are applied. > > Second, 'one (wo)man, one vote' is a nice slogan, but it's just no > enough in our post-national constellation. We have to think about > how in the 'post-democratic' order (in the sense of post-nation > state-based democracy) order legitimacy can be conveyed in the > process of producing norms. > > Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need > to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This > process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But > multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is > a new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national > constellations. > > Just as good democracy does nationally, multistakeholder-baesd > decision-making have heightened input legitimacy and lead to > normative outcomes that are materially reflective of the > individual¹s central needs (and thus have high output legitimacy). > > This is one of the points I'm making in the published version of my > PhD which Eleven International will publish in autumn. > > So less talk about democracy, and more talk about legitimacy. > > Kind regards > > Matthias > > -- > Dr. Matthias C. Kettemann, LL.M. (Harvard) > Institute of International Law and International Relations > University of Graz > E | matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at > Blog | internationallawandtheinternet.blogspot.com > ________________________________________ > Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > ] im Auftrag von Norbert Bollow [nb at bollow.ch] > Gesendet: Montag, 01. Oktober 2012 22:23 > An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles > > Dear all > > I'm rather alarmed by Wolfgang's assertion that "Multistakeholderism > *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy". > > I would suggest that the main point of democracy is to safeguard the > public interest against being overpowered by powerful particular > interests. > > By contrast, multistakeholderism allows all stakeholders to > participate > without restriction. This implies that it cannot contain adequate > processes for making decisions on those questions which, due to > significant conflicts between different legitimate interest, cannot be > resolved by rough consensus. > > It is true that democratic governance systems tend to have > imperfections, and I'm all in favor of working on fixing any and all > bugs that can be clearly identified and for which a known solution > strategy exists. One of these bugs is the current tendency of > governments (including in particular the judicial branch) to make > Internet related decisions without understanding what they're doing. > As you know I'm proposing to address this bug by means of a > multistakeholder process to create informative recommendation > documents to inform them better. > ( http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) > > But please let's avoid talking about multistakeholderism as if it in > itself somehow were an improved form of democracy. It isn't. > > Further, I agree with the points made by Michael Gurstein and David > Allen. > > Greetings, > Norbert > > > David Allen wrote: > >> How many times has this list been around this track ...? >> >> Norbert Klein rightly brings to attention the difficulties to which >> democracy can be prey. >> >> And Winston Churchill helped us understand - in that very sober >> light >> - where we stand today: "... democracy is the worst form of >> government except all the others that have been tried." >> >> By no stretch of the imagination does so-called multi-stakeholderism >> hold out prospect to be a replacement. >> >> That does not of course remove the terrible blemishes democracy may >> create. In fact, another Churchill quote holds that: "The best >> argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the >> average voter." >> >> What is clear is that we just might benefit from some quality >> thinking and some hard, collaborative work, to try to understand how >> representativeness may be instantiated, in a much-more-connected >> world, and especially in a world that now truly becomes global. >> Where agreement among very many, and many very different, actors is >> now often urgent. But more and more difficult to cobble together, >> because of the scale and attendant complexity. Yet, ultimate power >> in individual citizen hands is therefore all the more paramount, as >> the starting point. >> >> Rather than shibboleths, as seemingly easy - but really just facile >> - answers, we might apply ourselves to the serious work at hand. >> >> As Michael Gurstein has encouraged. >> >> David >> >> On Oct 1, 2012, at 10:36 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >>> Very good question Norbert and I well accept your cases and I >>> don't have any easy answers (but nor I think, does anyone elseŠ >>> >>> Two things though, I know for sure that governance by self- >>> appointed, essentially unaccountable "stakeholders" is not >>> "democracy" at least by any definition I understand, and also that >>> we probably need to have some sort of collective rethinking/ >>> redefinition of what we do mean by democracy in an age of >>> instantaneous and essentially free and massified communication and >>> information, the capacity for borderless (and defenseless) action >>> at a distance, mass literacy, and other manifestations of the >>> technologically transformed world that has emerged and would be >>> completely unrecognizable to the conceptualizers of representative >>> democracy in the 18th and 19th century. >>> >>> Issues of scale and unit (macro and micro the neighborhood, the >>> tribe, the province, the nation, the world); issues of >>> accountability and transparency (increased opportunity for and >>> increased means to avoid), issues of efficacy (personal, >>> collective, associative) and a wide range of others need to be >>> accounted for and I think "we" as a species have only just started >>> that rethinking processŠ >>> >>> In the meantime abandoning something that we do know and >>> understand and have some experience with for leaps in the dark >>> seems to me to be a not very useful place to begin. >>> >>> M >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >>> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org ] On Behalf Of >>> Norbert Klein Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 10:08 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles >>> >>> Interesting and important. >>> My question relates to this part: ³the degree to which such >>> processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within >>> any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) >>> would understand.² >>> There is an assumption what ³most of us² would expect ­ but it is >>> not defined. >>> So I assume ­ maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of ³one man (or woman) >>> one vote²? If not ­ so what? Please elaborate. >>> This surely was a good principle ­ it was used a lot arguing, for >>> example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected >>> it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists >>> (the ³Nationalsozialisten² = Nazi²), with the help of the German >>> National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 >>> ­ starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many >>> others too. >>> ³Demo-cracy² hints at a concept that the will of the people >>> governs. But how? >>> The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the >>> National Assembly through every vote since 1993 ­ but the UN >>> Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has >>> raised serious concerns because the electoral system ­ especially >>> the National Election Committee ­ is controlled by government >>> appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the >>> National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people >>> forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have >>> not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency >>> related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level >>> ­ more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same >>> vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? >>> The question is not only: What is democratic? ­ In the actual >>> situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the >>> good goal that ³the people's² benefits (not the majority of the >>> people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering >>> at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are >>> central? It is on this background that I well understand the short >>> statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet >>> Governance: ³Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of >>> participatory democracy² If it is not ­ so what else, and how? >>> >>> Norbert Klein >>> Phnom Penh/Cambodia >>> >>> = >>> >>> On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >>> Wolfgang and all, >>> >>> I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a >>> series of >>> multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in >>> several >>> African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons >>> which I >>> won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... >>> >>> However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while >>> `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very >>> effective as an >>> inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very >>> far from >>> what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` >>> (unless, as in >>> some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate >>> the notions >>> of management with democracy). >>> >>> The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of >>> interests it >>> is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those >>> interests. >>> So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might >>> be a very >>> effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small >>> holder farmers the precise process of accountability and >>> representivity is in many >>> instances a very open question subject to for example, the >>> personailities of >>> individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political >>> interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former >>> affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such >>> processes >>> could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any >>> definition of the >>> term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. >>> >>> I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi- >>> stakeholder >>> governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to >>> contribute >>> to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative >>> would still >>> leave open the question of overall democractic governance and >>> accountability >>> of the Internet. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Mike > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Oct 1 21:20:20 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2012 21:20:20 -0400 Subject: [governance] Private room available in 3 BR flat Nov. 2-9 in Baku Message-ID: <035701cda03c$1a0094a0$4e01bde0$@gmail.com> Via AirBnB I've rented a 3 BR flat in Baku for Nov. 2-9 at a very modest rate. I'm taking one BR, a colleague is taking a second and the person for the 3rd has just taken alternative accommodation so his room is now available. The total rent for the week will be in the $150 USD range (I have no idea as to the amenities available in the accommodation but the owner has assured me that it has good Internet access and is about 30 minutes away from the conference site by taxi and about 40 minutes by public transit. Anyone interested should contact me asap. Best, Mike -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Mon Oct 1 22:38:15 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:38:15 +0900 Subject: [governance] WCIT - CS In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD375@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <506089AD.3020007@itforchange.net> <50617C44.6020104@itforchange.net> <506187A9.1060903@itforchange.net> <50618D5F.7000601@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD375@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Dear list, First, thanks Wolfgang for sharing this. I have to say that I am not following much on ITU/WCIT/ITR issues recently. Now, ITU is calling for Civil Society's opinions on the ITR, and hold a meeting on Oct. 9 at their HQ in Geneva. What is your reaction? Should we try to compile send our comments? Are there anyone who could go to the meeting and express our views? If we don't act now, we might be told later "we opened the door, but you didn't enter", or just do not bother? best, izumi 2012/9/26 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" : > http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/WCIT%20Briefing%20Session%20for%20Civil%20Society%20Stakeholders.pdf > > FYI > > w > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From ceo at bnnrc.net Tue Oct 2 00:02:52 2012 From: ceo at bnnrc.net (AHM Bazlur Rahman) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 10:02:52 +0600 Subject: [governance] WCIT - CS In-Reply-To: References: <506089AD.3020007@itforchange.net> <50617C44.6020104@itforchange.net> <506187A9.1060903@itforchange.net> <50618D5F.7000601@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD375@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: *Dear Izumi,* Thank you very much for your mail regarding WCIT. We think we have to engage with WCIT process because WCIT is very important for reshaping overall telecommunication in line with IGF. We hope, you will join Geneva meeting and develop our position on WCIT. With best regards, Bazlu _______________________ AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR Chief Executive Officer Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) [NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council] & Head, Community Media Academy House: 13/1, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207 Bangladesh Phone: +88-02-9130750, +88-02-9138501, Cell: +88 01711881647 Fax: 88-02-9138501-105, E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net, bnnr cbd at gmail.com www.bnnrc.net On 2 October 2012 08:38, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > First, thanks Wolfgang for sharing this. > > I have to say that I am not following much on ITU/WCIT/ITR issues recently. > > Now, ITU is calling for Civil Society's opinions on the ITR, and hold > a meeting on Oct. 9 at their HQ in Geneva. > > What is your reaction? > Should we try to compile send our comments? > Are there anyone who could go to the meeting and express our views? > If we don't act now, we might be told later "we opened the door, but > you didn't enter", or just do not bother? > > best, > > izumi > > > 2012/9/26 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" > : > > > http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/WCIT%20Briefing%20Session%20for%20Civil%20Society%20Stakeholders.pdf > > > > FYI > > > > w > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > >> 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.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: -------------- 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 From sana.pryhod at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 01:16:59 2012 From: sana.pryhod at gmail.com (Oksana Prykhodko) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:16:59 +0300 Subject: [governance] WCIT - CS In-Reply-To: References: <506089AD.3020007@itforchange.net> <50617C44.6020104@itforchange.net> <506187A9.1060903@itforchange.net> <50618D5F.7000601@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD375@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Dear all, Thank you very much for sharing this information. This Saturday (28 September) we had our Third IGF-UA. I can't say that it was very successful, but at least one extremely important achievement we have: Thanks to participation of Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Sebastien Bacholet, Michail Yakushev, Leonid Todorov and others, we for the first time openly discussed Ukrainian official position in Dubai. So, I will be happy to join your statement, to translate it into Russian/Ukrainian and to share within post-Soviet community. Best regards, Oksana 2012/10/2 AHM Bazlur Rahman : > Dear Izumi, > Thank you very much for your mail regarding WCIT. > > We think we have to engage with WCIT process because WCIT is very important > for reshaping overall telecommunication in line with IGF. > > We hope, you will join Geneva meeting and develop our position on WCIT. > > With best regards, > > > Bazlu > _______________________ > AHM. Bazlur Rahman-S21BR > Chief Executive Officer > Bangladesh NGOs Network for Radio and Communication (BNNRC) > [NGO in Special Consultative Status with the UN Economic and Social Council] > & > Head, Community Media Academy > > House: 13/1, Road: 2, Shaymoli, Dhaka-1207 Bangladesh > Phone: +88-02-9130750, +88-02-9138501, Cell: +88 01711881647 > Fax: 88-02-9138501-105, > E-mail: ceo at bnnrc.net, bnnrcbd at gmail.com www.bnnrc.net > > > > > > > On 2 October 2012 08:38, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> Dear list, >> First, thanks Wolfgang for sharing this. >> >> I have to say that I am not following much on ITU/WCIT/ITR issues >> recently. >> >> Now, ITU is calling for Civil Society's opinions on the ITR, and hold >> a meeting on Oct. 9 at their HQ in Geneva. >> >> What is your reaction? >> Should we try to compile send our comments? >> Are there anyone who could go to the meeting and express our views? >> If we don't act now, we might be told later "we opened the door, but >> you didn't enter", or just do not bother? >> >> best, >> >> izumi >> >> >> 2012/9/26 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" >> : >> > >> > http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/WCIT%20Briefing%20Session%20for%20Civil%20Society%20Stakeholders.pdf >> > >> > FYI >> > >> > w >> > >> > >> > >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> >> 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.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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Tue Oct 2 02:19:51 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 08:19:51 +0200 Subject: [governance] WCIT - CS In-Reply-To: References: <506089AD.3020007@itforchange.net> <50617C44.6020104@itforchange.net> <506187A9.1060903@itforchange.net> <50618D5F.7000601@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD375@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Hi I will be there. If a new input of some sort is developed I'm happy to pass it along. If not, I can either channel the main thrust of caucus discussions re: an ITU role since we started discussing this in Feb. 03, or I can speak with a different hat. Either way, one of the goals of the Best Bits meeting Jeremy is organizing in Baku is to produce a statement for input, so that's another opportunity. Best Bill On Oct 2, 2012, at 4:38, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > First, thanks Wolfgang for sharing this. > > I have to say that I am not following much on ITU/WCIT/ITR issues recently. > > Now, ITU is calling for Civil Society's opinions on the ITR, and hold > a meeting on Oct. 9 at their HQ in Geneva. > > What is your reaction? > Should we try to compile send our comments? > Are there anyone who could go to the meeting and express our views? > If we don't act now, we might be told later "we opened the door, but > you didn't enter", or just do not bother? > > best, > > izumi > > > 2012/9/26 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" > : >> http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/WCIT%20Briefing%20Session%20for%20Civil%20Society%20Stakeholders.pdf >> >> FYI >> >> w >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > -- >>> 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From karl at cavebear.com Tue Oct 2 02:49:49 2012 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 23:49:49 -0700 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <506A8E8D.8070608@cavebear.com> On 10/01/2012 12:52 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism is oligarchy and not democratic at all. I remind people of my paper of several years ago - "Stakeholderism - The Wrong Road For Internet Governance" - at http://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/igf-democracy-in-internet-governance.pdf Stakeholderism assigns one, and often more, voices to those who have "stake", typically measured in financial terms. That means that some speakers, those with "stake" get to speak louder than others. Indeed often those with "stake" exclude those without from the fora and processes of decision-making. Do we really want a system of internet governance based on the long discarded notion that there is a hierarchy among people of "stake"; that there is a kind of royal rank and nobility, that makes some people more worthy than others to govern the internet? The rule should be one person, one vote, no more, no less. Each individual human should be the atomic unit of internet governance, not how much money that person has, how he/she has invested that money, which corporations he/she is affiliated with, or whether he/she owns trademarks or intellectual property. I have no problem with exercising democracy via representatives. But I do have a problem with systems that give different or additional tickets of admission to some and smaller tickets, or no tickets at all, to others. The list of bodies of governance that have sold their souls to those who have "stake" and have thus become captives of those who they have so designated is a list that runs from A to Z. It is not a list of successes; it is a list of failures. Anyone who has a "stake" is free to express his/her views - as a person - and cast his/her votes - as a person - along with everyone else, with equality. But to give that person an additional or louder voice - no. --karl-- -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Tue Oct 2 02:51:59 2012 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 23:51:59 -0700 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <506A8F0F.8090701@cavebear.com> I thought that I'd add that I find the following to be an extremely useful starting point when talking about internet governance: First Law of the Internet http://www.cavebear.com/cbblog-archives/000059.html + Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way that is privately beneficial without being publicly detrimental. - The burden of demonstrating public detriment shall be on those who wish to prevent the private use. - Such a demonstration shall require clear and convincing evidence of public detriment. - The public detriment must be of such degree and extent as to justify the suppression of the private activity. --karl-- -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Tue Oct 2 03:45:55 2012 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 09:45:55 +0200 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <20121002094555.346d0884@quill.bollow.ch> Matthias Kettemann : > Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need > to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This > process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But > multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is a > new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national > constellations. Hi Matthias Could you explain the precise meaning of "legitimacy" in this context? Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 04:08:11 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 11:08:11 +0300 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> Message-ID: <506AA0EB.5080003@gmail.com> I am always open to optimism of the will and pessimism of the intellect (ok I try...often unsuccesfully)... The contextual issues in MSG at IGF are missing from the commodious term democracy (of which there are many)... let me put it blunty from a CIR perspective... we have a non-binding IGF with MSG but are effectively precluded from discussing CIR in large order... one would have expected a non-binding inclusive process to be just the opposite... perhaps more work is needed with some guidance from critics otherwise we just a half glass full while others drink up the water while we are not looking... On 2012/10/01 05:07 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > > Interesting and important. > > My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such processes > could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition > of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand.” > > There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is not > defined. > > So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) one > vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. > > This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for > example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected it. > > Was it a triumph of democracy when the National > Socialists*(*the*“Na*tionalso*zi*alisten*” = Nazi”),*with the help of > the German National People's Party > , were > victorious in elections inMarch 1933 –starting a dark age of German > history, tremendous damage on many others too. > > “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people governs. > But how? > > The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the > National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN Special > Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has raised > serious concerns becausethe electoral system – especially the National > Election Committee – is controlled by government appointees, NOT > representing the plurality of parties in the National Assembly. And > thousands and thousands of people forcefully evicted from their > traditional areas of residency have not only lost their homes, but > they are no longer on residency related voter lists. > > Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level – more democratic, where > 14 million Cambodia havethe same vote-weight as 235+ million of > Indonesia? > > The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual > situations where we live it meansalso: How do we move towards the good > goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the people who > voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering at the same > time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are central? > > It is on this background that I well understand theshort statement > (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet Governance: > > “Multistakeholderism**IS** the highest form of participatory democracy” > > If it is not – so what else, and how? > > > Norbert Klein > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > = > > On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> Wolfgang and all, >> >> I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a series of >> multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in several >> African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons which I >> won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... >> >> However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while >> `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective as an >> inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far from >> what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, as in >> some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the notions >> of management with democracy). >> >> The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of interests it >> is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those interests. >> So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might be a very >> effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder >> farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is in many >> instances a very open question subject to for example, the personailities of >> individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political >> interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former >> affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such processes >> could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the >> term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. >> >> I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi-stakeholder >> governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to contribute >> to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative would still >> leave open the question of overall democractic governance and accountability >> of the Internet. >> >> Best, >> >> Mike > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Tue Oct 2 04:25:29 2012 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 04:25:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <20121002094555.346d0884@quill.bollow.ch> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <20121002094555.346d0884@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: <8CF6E8E9DA19F07-1FF0-6910A@webmail-d035.sysops.aol.com> French political discourse makes a very clear distinction between "legitimacy" and "legality." "Legality" is seen as merely formal. Something that is legal may not be legitimate. "Legitimacy" is seen as having moral authority. But something that is legitimate may not be legal. Thus, right wingers opposed to the Popular Front government in the 1930s claimed that it represented the "apparent country" as opposed to the "real country," in other words that the government was legal but not legitimate. Rony Koven -----Original Message----- From: Norbert Bollow To: governance Sent: Tue, Oct 2, 2012 9:46 am Subject: Re: [governance] Principles Matthias Kettemann : > Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need > to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This > process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But > multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is a > new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national > constellations. Hi Matthias Could you explain the precise meaning of "legitimacy" in this context? Greetings, Norbert ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Tue Oct 2 04:29:43 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 10:29:43 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <506A8E8D.8070608@cavebear.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <506A8E8D.8070608@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <1086672262.45006.1349166583269.JavaMail.www@wwinf1d25> Well said, Karl ! Your opinion after Ronny's reminder on the common sense, set my mind at rest as regards CS vision on Internet and realities Best regards Jean-Louis Fulsack > Message du 02/10/12 08:50 > De : "Karl Auerbach" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] Principles > > On 10/01/2012 12:52 AM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > > > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy > > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. > > I remind people of my paper of several years ago - "Stakeholderism - The > Wrong Road For Internet Governance" - at > http://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/igf-democracy-in-internet-governance.pdf > > Stakeholderism assigns one, and often more, voices to those who have > "stake", typically measured in financial terms. > > That means that some speakers, those with "stake" get to speak louder > than others. Indeed often those with "stake" exclude those without from > the fora and processes of decision-making. > > Do we really want a system of internet governance based on the long > discarded notion that there is a hierarchy among people of "stake"; that > there is a kind of royal rank and nobility, that makes some people more > worthy than others to govern the internet? > > The rule should be one person, one vote, no more, no less. > > Each individual human should be the atomic unit of internet governance, > not how much money that person has, how he/she has invested that money, > which corporations he/she is affiliated with, or whether he/she owns > trademarks or intellectual property. > > I have no problem with exercising democracy via representatives. But I > do have a problem with systems that give different or additional tickets > of admission to some and smaller tickets, or no tickets at all, to others. > > The list of bodies of governance that have sold their souls to those who > have "stake" and have thus become captives of those who they have so > designated is a list that runs from A to Z. It is not a list of > successes; it is a list of failures. > > Anyone who has a "stake" is free to express his/her views - as a person > - and cast his/her votes - as a person - along with everyone else, with > equality. But to give that person an additional or louder voice - no. > > --karl-- > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From rafik.dammak at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 04:42:39 2012 From: rafik.dammak at gmail.com (Rafik Dammak) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 10:42:39 +0200 Subject: [governance] Youth Tech Camp in Pakistan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Sala, Since IGF Hyderabad , there is a youth workshop organised by youth coalition on IG in addition to to other workshops organised by YCIG members (the first workshop was organised by diplo foundation ), and YCIG made statements during main sessions in Vilnius and Nairobi and can be found in ycig.org but no youth main session. there will be also a coalition meeting in Baku. Best, Rafik Le dimanche 30 septembre 2012, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro a écrit : > Hi Nighat, > > That's excellent and it will be good to have this information shared > amongst those within the Arab IGF. I am not sure if there is a Youth > Session in Baku and if there is it will be wonderful to hear from you and > others who were involved in similar camps. > > Warm Regards, > Sala > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 7:47 AM, Nighat Dad wrote: > > Hi Sala, > > Thanks for posting this. I was one of the lead trainer in the camp. > > Best, > Nighat Dad > Skype: Nighat.dad > Twitter: @nighatdad > > Sent from my iPad > > On 30-Sep-2012, at 12:40 AM, "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear All, > > It was really great to read about the Youth Tech Camp in Pakistan, see > below: > > You are subscribed to South and Central Asia for U.S. Department of State. > This information has recently been updated, and is now available. > South and Central Asia: U.S. Department of State Hosts Youth TechCamp in > Pakistan: Empowering Youth for Social Change > 09/29/2012 10:39 AM EDT > > U.S. Department of State Hosts Youth TechCamp in Pakistan: Empowering > Youth for Social Change > > Media Note > Office of the Spokesperson > Washington, DC > September 29, 2012 > > ------------------------------ > > The U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs > (ECA), in collaboration with U.S. Embassy Islamabad and iEARN, > hosted Youth TechCamp in Islamabad, Pakistan, September 27-29, 2012. A > signature series hosted by the State Department to increase digital > literacy, Youth TechCamp Pakistan engaged 40 alumni of the Kennedy-Lugar > Youth Exchange and Study (YES) Program . > > Youth TechCamp Pakistan encourages young people to engage and contribute > to the digital networks and technologies of today’s interconnected world. > > Youth TechCamp Pakistan provided three full days of training with top > local technology experts specializing in civic journalism and social > activism. Youth TechCamp Pakistan enabled these future leaders to learn how > they can leverage connection technologies to make a positive impact in > their communities and around the world. > > Join the conversation on Youth TechCamp Pakistan on Facebook and > Twitter using the hashtag #TechCamp. See photos from Youth TechCamp > Pakistan here > . > > For more information and media inquiries about the Youth TechCamp, contact > Suzanne Philion at PhilionSK at state.gov > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Rafik Dammak @rafik "fight for the users" -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at Tue Oct 2 05:00:11 2012 From: matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at (Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann@uni-graz.at)) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 11:00:11 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <506AA0EB.5080003@gmail.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net>,<506AA0EB.5080003@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dear all, @ Norbert >> Now, what does this mean for the Internet Governance debate? We need >> to identify the best process of how to convey legitimacy. This >> process, as has been pointed out, is multistakeholderism. But >> multistakeholderism is not a form of participatory democracy; it is a >> new form of conveying legitimacy in post-democratic trans-national >> constellations. > > Could you explain the precise meaning of "legitimacy" in this context? > I suggest that an International Internet norm is legitimate if it meets a formal and a material legitimacy requirement: - formally, it needs to be symbolically validated through its emergence in a multi-stakeholder process (the input and throughput dimension of legitimacy), - materially, it needs to be determinate enough for its purpose (thus allowing for non-binding instruments), cohere with the Internet’s core principles and be consonant with the values of Internet Governance, and adhere systematically to the broader normative system of Internet Governance (the output dimension of legitimacy). Norms and norm-making procedures that meet the formal and material conditions of legitimacy that I have outlined above can overcome a problem Pierre Mounier identifies, namely that “no global internet governance body will be able to accumulate enough legitimacy over such a heterogeneous world; nor can traditional national states pretend to rule over it." Internet Governance norms are legitimate not because there is one central norm-making body – or because states exercise control – but because all stakeholders contribute to the process. They symbolically validate it and thus ensure that the norms meet the standards necessary for effective regulation, including determinacy, inner coherence, consonance with and adherence to the stakeholder-encompassing fundamental values @ Karl > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism is oligarchy and not democratic at all. Multistakholerdism means - in abstract - that all those who are touched by the normative outcomes of a normative process should have a say in the process. MS can be oligarchic if only some are heard (because of their position, wealth etc.). But it can be desigend in a way that avoids this dilemma. @ Rony > This discussion really can't be serious. It opens up an incredible can of worms and seems to be posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 previous years of political philosophy and history. The nation state is going to be with us for the foreseeable future (that is to say, our lifetimes) as the source and locus of law and power. Yes, the nation state will continue to be important, but the way international legal instruments have been created of lately evidences a clear trend towards the inclusion of non-state actors, other stakeholders. Just take the Rome Statute of the ICC as example where NGOs had an important role to play in the treaty-making process. This is evidence of the trend that I'm describing. In international law, we call it humanizatinon, the development away from a purely state-focused international order to an order that takes into account other entities. > The Internet has not put an end to the nation state, much as some people on this list would like to believe. Try telling a traffic policeman that he can't arrest you because you're not a citizen but a netizen, and see where you end up. Nobody who is serious believes that the Internet puts an end to the nation state. But nobody who wants to be taken seriously should argue that there have been no changes to the way legal and paralegal norms bearing upon the Internet are created and implemented. And regarding the policeman: Go to him and ask him to help you in arresting the, say, Tajistikan-based spammer with Australian nationality who uses servers in Sao Tomé ... and see where it gets you. Regarding David&Michael: I haven't forgotten you, but I am travelling ... so bear with me, I'll get to you soon. And no, the Nazis enver got to power legitimaely. In the last free elections they received a third of the vote. They then used a campaign of intimidaiton, violence and fear. BTW: Respect Godwin's Law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law Cheers Matthias ________________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] im Auftrag von Riaz K Tayob [riaz.tayob at gmail.com] Gesendet: Dienstag, 02. Oktober 2012 10:08 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Klein Betreff: Re: [governance] Principles I am always open to optimism of the will and pessimism of the intellect (ok I try...often unsuccesfully)... The contextual issues in MSG at IGF are missing from the commodious term democracy (of which there are many)... let me put it blunty from a CIR perspective... we have a non-binding IGF with MSG but are effectively precluded from discussing CIR in large order... one would have expected a non-binding inclusive process to be just the opposite... perhaps more work is needed with some guidance from critics otherwise we just a half glass full while others drink up the water while we are not looking... On 2012/10/01 05:07 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: Interesting and important. My question relates to this part: “the degree to which such processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand.” There is an assumption what “most of us” would expect – but it is not defined. So I assume – maybe wrongly? - it is a kind of “one man (or woman) one vote”? If not – so what? Please elaborate. This surely was a good principle – it was used a lot arguing, for example, against the South African Apartheid regime which rejected it. Was it a triumph of democracy when the National Socialists (the “Nationalsozialisten” = Nazi”), with the help of the German National People's Party, were victorious in elections in March 1933 – starting a dark age of German history, tremendous damage on many others too. “Demo-cracy” hints at a concept that the will of the people governs. But how? The Cambodian People's Party has gained more and more seats in the National Assembly through every vote since 1993 – but the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Cambodia has raised serious concerns because the electoral system – especially the National Election Committee – is controlled by government appointees, NOT representing the plurality of parties in the National Assembly. And thousands and thousands of people forcefully evicted from their traditional areas of residency have not only lost their homes, but they are no longer on residency related voter lists. Is the one-country-one-vote - on the UN level – more democratic, where 14 million Cambodia have the same vote-weight as 235+ million of Indonesia? The question is not only: What is democratic? – In the actual situations where we live it means also: How do we move towards the good goal that “the people's” benefits (not the majority of the people who voted in the Nazis in Germany, I add, without offering at the same time a rationale for my personal opinion here) are central? It is on this background that I well understand the short statement (which is open to misunderstandings) about Internet Governance: “Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy” If it is not – so what else, and how? Norbert Klein Phnom Penh/Cambodia = On 10/1/2012 7:59 PM, michael gurstein wrote: Wolfgang and all, I`ve just had an opportunity to observe at somewhat close hand a series of multi-stakeholder processes at work (in Agriculture planning) in several African countries... I was quite impressed for a number of reasons which I won`t go into here (I`m currently working on the report... However, one conclusion that I would draw is that while `multi-stakeholderism` is in at least some instances very effective as an inclusive, let`s say `participative` management tool it is very far from what I, or I think almost anyone would call ``democratic`` (unless, as in some I think, quite perverse instances, one chooses to conflate the notions of management with democracy). The problem is that while multi-stakeholderism is inclusive of interests it is not necessarily accountable or representative of or for those interests. So for example, while a national or reagional farmers` union might be a very effective stakeholder representative of the interests of small holder farmers the precise process of accountability and representivity is in many instances a very open question subject to for example, the personailities of individuals, literacy, access to media and information, political interference etc. etc. The latter caveats do not preclude the former affirmations but they do strongly bracket the degree to which such processes could at all be called ``democratic`` at least within any definition of the term that I (or I would expect most of us) would understand. I think your broad objective of pursuing a framework for multi-stakeholder governance of the Internet is a worthwhile one and one I hope to contribute to in Baku, however, I think a useful outcome of that initiative would still leave open the question of overall democractic governance and accountability of the Internet. Best, Mike -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 05:15:22 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 12:15:22 +0300 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com > Message-ID: <506AB0AA.8090202@gmail.com> + 1 On 2012/10/02 01:10 AM, Koven Ronald wrote: > Dear All -- > > This discussion really can't be serious. It opens up an incredible can > of worms and seems to be posited on the notion that the Internet has > revoked the 2,500 previous years of political philosophy and history. > The nation state is going to be with us for the foreseeable future > (that is to say, our lifetimes) as the source and locus of law and > power. The Internet has not put an end to the nation state, much as > some people on this list would like to believe. Try telling a traffic > policeman that he can't arrest you because you're not a citizen but a > netizen, and see where you end up. > > Cheers, Rony Koven > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 05:17:06 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 12:17:06 +0300 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <506A8E8D.8070608@cavebear.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <506A8E8D.8070608@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <506AB112.4080004@gmail.com> the critique you mention is sustained (it seems) by liberal notions of formal equality (i.e. Google is the same as IT4C - when in fact there are qualitative differences)... which is partly the reason why discussing the merits of MSG is so fraught with difficulty... On 2012/10/02 09:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Tue Oct 2 07:18:54 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 20:18:54 +0900 Subject: [governance] WCIT - CS In-Reply-To: References: <506089AD.3020007@itforchange.net> <50617C44.6020104@itforchange.net> <506187A9.1060903@itforchange.net> <50618D5F.7000601@digsys.bg> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD375@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Thanks Bill for attending there. Is there anyone who could draft a short IGC statement to be delivered there? Else, we trust Bill to pick up our summary position to share there. izumi 2012/10/2 William Drake : > Hi > > I will be there. If a new input of some sort is developed I'm happy to pass it along. If not, I can either channel the main thrust of caucus discussions re: an ITU role since we started discussing this in Feb. 03, or I can speak with a different hat. Either way, one of the goals of the Best Bits meeting Jeremy is organizing in Baku is to produce a statement for input, so that's another opportunity. > > Best > > Bill > > On Oct 2, 2012, at 4:38, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> First, thanks Wolfgang for sharing this. >> >> I have to say that I am not following much on ITU/WCIT/ITR issues recently. >> >> Now, ITU is calling for Civil Society's opinions on the ITR, and hold >> a meeting on Oct. 9 at their HQ in Geneva. >> >> What is your reaction? >> Should we try to compile send our comments? >> Are there anyone who could go to the meeting and express our views? >> If we don't act now, we might be told later "we opened the door, but >> you didn't enter", or just do not bother? >> >> best, >> >> izumi >> >> >> 2012/9/26 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" >> : >>> http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12/Documents/WCIT%20Briefing%20Session%20for%20Civil%20Society%20Stakeholders.pdf >>> >>> FYI >>> >>> w >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >>>> 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.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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan www.anr.org -------------- 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 From fahd.batayneh at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 07:54:32 2012 From: fahd.batayneh at gmail.com (Fahd A. Batayneh) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 20:54:32 +0900 Subject: [governance] Chinese Government "Hacks into White House Office in Charge of the Nuclear Launch Codes" Message-ID: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211230/Chinese-government-hacks-White-House-office-charge-nuclear-launch-codes.html#ixzz287aCgv1N - White House confirmed the hack but downplayed it, saying no damage was done and it was unsuccessful - Military Office targeted which controls the President's travel, interoffice communications, and nuclear codes Fahd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Oct 2 08:18:25 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 17:48:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Principles In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <506ADB91.3070004@itforchange.net> Dear Wolfgang, Thanks for taking up this discussion on democracy vrs MSism . It is most needed. Like many others here I react with horror about any assertion of MSism being the pinnacle of participatory democracy, or as Matthias K puts it, approvingly, MSism being post democratic (something I have been saying as an aspersion on MSism). Let me use the schema I employed to describe to an government official recently what my vision of an appropriate IGF is. This was with regard to developing an India IGF model... This is how I described to him. I can see the (continued) progression of democracy in three versions. Version 1.0 was when elected officials assumed full authority to legislate and execute, once they were elected, without any reliance on any axillary democratic processes of public consultations. Ministries were steeped in deep secrecy and considerable aloofness from the public. Ver 2.0 begun when elected officials started to employ some processes of democracy beyond elections, like undertaking public consultation on various legislative proposals, stakeholder consultations with those directly affected by any governmental measure, forming ad hoc or standing committees with civil society and outside expert participations, instituting right to information legislations etc..... However, at this stage, public participation was still largely ad hoc, mostly on the terms of the government, and largely not institutionalised. Ver 3.0 of democracy (and ver 2.0 of participatory democracy) is about strong institutionalisation of means and processes of participation (outside of elections) in an ongoing manner, whereby the agenda of such participation can be set with a greatly curtailed influence of the government, if any, the processes are largely out of control of governments and so on. It is independently institutionalised, funded, legitimised, etc. However, there is never a doubt that actual policy making authority remains with representative democratic bodies (how much improvement they my need which is to be pursued at another level). There has always to be sufficiently clear difference between institutions of participation, while they have to made as strong and inclusive as possible, and those of legislation and execution. I support Norbert's recent assertions in this regard. Well, this is how I said I see UN IGF normatively as. A path breaking innovation in global democracy denoting Ver 3.0 of democracy, which should also be replicated at national levels. Now, this Democracy 3.0 model is not necessarily an invention of the the IG space. A lot of theoretical and practical work in the area of institutionalising participatory democracy has been done, especially over the last decade or two. John Gaventa's work, especially on invited versus invented spaces of participation, comes to mind in this regard. There is also the famous Porto Alegre initiative of institutionalising public participation, through participatory budget exercises. Lately ICTs have been used in Porto Alegre and other places to improve the ambit and effectiveness of participation. So, yes, ICTs do provide what is perhaps a transformational new context to possibilities of institutionalising participation. As said, I see/ saw UN IGF as a Democracy 3.0 experiment, which however has now increasingly being high-jacked by special interests, largely in aid of global digital corporates. Unfortunately, MS-ism instead of being another name for Democracy 3.0 as some people here are trying to argue, has, in practice, mostly represented everything which seems going wrong with the IGF, and other new age information society policy mechanisms. It is bit surprising that in this very interesting discussion on relationship or difference between democracy and MSism, no one has pointed to the elephant in the room. It is of course the growing economic, social and political power of mega corporates, and how a good amount of MSism in practice is a front for political legitimisation of corporatist power in ordering our societies. The article at http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/how-google-lobbies-german-government-over-internet-regulation-a-857654-druck.html on how Google has infiltrated most 'participatory processes' in and around Germany's IG space makes the case rather eloquently. Then one reads how 84 out of 108 Google lobbyists in the US are ex gov employees and what influence it exercises on the behaviour of expectant government officials still in service (http://keionline.org/node/1555 ). And now, in Brazil, we find that Google thinks that it has some kind of independent jurisdictional status whereby it can decide what to do or not do with national laws, using its Internet based powers, including by making backhanded appeals to users (http://people.oii.ox.ac.uk/thompson/2012/09/27/on-the-arrest-of-googles-head-in-brazil/ ). The institutionalisation of participatory spaces and processes of Democracy 3.0 needs to be done with no less care then was done in the case of basic representative democracy. It needs similar building of values, norms and highest principles, and also, most importantly, safeguards against capture. Unfortunately most adherents of MSism are averse to any deep discussions on these issues. And to me that is the principal undoing of MSism. Matthias, if you can critique current relevance of democracy citing the difference between formal and material forms of democracy, maybe it is also worthwhile to pay attention to difference between formal and material aspects of MSism. Almost all the stuff I read about MSism in such discussions as this one is about formal MSism, which is made to look so good and inclusive. On the other hand, almost all of the material reality that I see around me of MSism (in IG) is about a very thinly veiled apology (and legitimisation) for growing political power of mega global digital corporates. Also worth a PhD for someone I suppose :) . Parminder On Monday 01 October 2012 01:22 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote: > Parminder: > multistakeholderism (whats wrong with participatory democracy?) > > Wolfgang: > Multistakeholderism *IS* the highest form of participatory democracy > > Parminder: > improvements to internationalism & national laws > > Wolfgang: > To errect (national) legal barriers for the free flow of information among people is a bad idea and contrary to individual human right to freedom of expression. Governments have an obligation under international law to guarantee access to and the distribution of information "regardless of frontiers". To undermine the borderless nature of the Internet and to introduce a system for Internet communication similar to global travel arrangements, (where you need a permission (visa) to leave or enter a country) brings us back into the cold war of the 20th century and would have bad and sad economic and social consequences in particular for individuals in developing countries. > > In this context I repeat my proposal to start in Baku with the work on a global "Multistakeholder Framework of Committment" on Internet Governance and Internet Freedom (FoC) which could take on board all the ideas and proposals expressed in the 20+ Internet Governance Principles declarations, resolutions and guidelines which has been adopted in the last two years by IBSA, Shanghai, OECD, CoE, OSCE, UNESCO and numerous non-governmental platforms, including the IGF Dynamic Coalition in Rights and Principles. The message from Baku should be to invite the MAG to form a WGIG like multistakeholder group of experts (during its February 2013 meeting in Paris) and to draft until the 8th IGF a first outline with the aim to have a substantial draft for high level discussion at the 9th IGF in 2014 and to adopt such a FoC by acclamation at the 10th IGF in 2015. > > wolfgang > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 09:14:03 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz Tayob) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:14:03 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: Principles In-Reply-To: <506ADB91.3070004@itforchange.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <506ADB91.3070004@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Parminder Formal equality of corporations as people (entitled to all sorts of rights, including funding the electoral process in the US after Citizens United decisions) is being taken up by a number of groups including at the state level of the US... The assumptions of formal equality are really problematic, because they apply deductive logic to the subject they address, and can be viewed as ideological in the sense that it excludes uncomfortable facts. Riaz On 2 October 2012 15:18, parminder wrote: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 09:17:24 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz Tayob) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:17:24 +0300 Subject: [governance] The Bicycle-Powered Internet? In-Reply-To: <24633757.1349152330286.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <24633757.1349152330286.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: http://www.greens.org/s-r/59/59-06.html *Eat, Sleep, Click: The Bicycle-Powered Internet* by Jane Anne Morris Save a tree, bank online. Subscribe online, reduce your carbon footprint. Listen to music online, watch movies online, read books online. No mess, no fuss. Google Inc. has photovoltaic (PV) solar panels on its headquarters. With all that footprint-lightening, you may soon be down to no ecological footprint at all, right? Since everyone wants the Internet to have a gentle footprint and not be "evil," we should power it with green electricity. Start with a bicycle generator and a server. Here are some back-of-the-envelope figures. All the stuff on the Internet, or in the "cloud," is kept aloft by computers called servers (plus routers and so on). An average server draws 400 watts/hour, half of that for cooling (fairly typical), and 3500 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, [1] because it never shuts down. *A healthy biker can produce a constant 100 watts/hour on a bicycle generator, a generous estimate. Four generator bikes at 100 watts/hour apiece would power a server. Alas, that single server can't accomplish much by itself. Various techies have estimated that a single online search activates between 1000 and 20,000 servers, often located all over the world. Numerous servers are housed together in places called server farms or data centers. To power a modest-sized data center (50,000 servers) by bicycle power would require almost a million pedalers and an area equivalent to 347 football fields. [2] Data centers can be as small as closets at the back of a business, or as large as several football fields and use as much electricity as small cities. They run 24/7/365, and tend to have multipl redundant backup systems, so no one has to wait 10 seconds to learn from a web site if it's raining outside.* What finally matters is not this or that server or data center, but the overall Internet electricity use. How much bicycle power would it take to run the Internet? Later we can figure out how to landscape the facility, and decide where to put the snack bars and port-a-potties. The EPA's conservative and dated number for 2006 Internet electricity use within the US alone is 60 billion kWh. Getting that much electricity from the setup described above would require 600 million bike generators. Assuming 6-hour pedaling shifts, that would take 2.4 billion pedalers. Think of the stimulus to the global economy: pedaling jobs for the entire populations of the US (305 million), Canada (33 million), Mexico (110 million), South America (382 million), India (1.5 billion), and Japan (127 million). Five years later, that number has doubled (at least). It is widely claimed that in 2010 the Internet used 3% of US electricity (3884 billion kWh), which is 117 billion kWh. So, we're now talking about 1.2 billion bike generators and 4.8 billion pedalers. In 2007, an independent outsider who is not on the dole of the IT industry calculated that US Internet energy use was around 350 billion kWh annually, approximately six times the EPA's 2006 estimate, [3] and three times the conservative 2010 estimate used above. I will use the lower numbers, but actual Internet electricity use may be much higher. What about worldwide Internet electricity use? Available 2010 estimates—200 billion kWh [4] — are probably conservative. Whatâat's that in bicycles? Using the same assumptions as before, that worldwide Internet could be powered by a mere two billion bike generators, with 8 billion people pedaling. (Current world (over)population is 7 billion.) If you placed that many bicycles end-to-end, they would reach far enough for three round trips to the moon, and then a trip back up. Who would want to design a bicycle-generator system to power the Internet? Someone who wanted to imagine a human-scale equivalent for how much energy the Internet already sucks up. What about other "renewable" energy sources? Solar and wind-powered Internet At the biggest, most successful photovoltaic projects in the world, the rule of thumb is that 10 acres of panels produces a megawatt of capacity (as would 10,000 bicycle generators). A square mile (640 acres) could provide 64 MW. Each megawatt might yield 1.5 million kWh/year, so the annual kWh from a square mile of good solar would be 96 million. Generating an annual 117 billion kWh (2010 US Internet use) with solar would require at least 1220 square miles of PV panels, and 78,000 MW. [5] For the 200 billion kWh number for world Internet use, it would take 2081 square miles (that's Delaware) and 133,200 MW. What about a wind-powered Internet? Experience in the wind turbine industry (and again in the choicest spots), has shown that it's good to get 20 MW of capacity per square mile. Three million kWh a year from each megawatt of capacity is also optimistic. Using wind turbines to get that 117 billion kWh for 2010 US Internet electricity use would require 1950 square miles. [6] The 200 billion kWh for 2010 world Internet use would require *3300 square miles*. Most wind power sites are less productive than the sites from which these numbers were derived. * *It's not appropriate to compare solar and wind directly to conventional power plants. Except for maintenance and accidents, coal and nuke plants operate 24/7, though demand drops at night. In contrast, solar is always down at night, and wind is variable, exactly what data centers can't be. *With solar, more than half the electricity would have to be stored for use when little or no power is generated. The huge batteries necessary for storing this much power look like a cross between upturned railroad freight cars and electric substations. They require space, maintenance, and cooling. Every time energy is converted from one form to another (like rotating energy to electrical energy to heat energy, or electricity into batteries and then out again) energy is lost. That slippage increases the initial kWh necessary, but I have not factored that in.* Also omitted in calculations here are the power lines, substations, maintenance roads, other support facilities, and ladders and buckets of ammonia water to clean PV panels. Not to mention the fact that most areas don't get nearly as much sun as the prize spots already selected for large solar arrays. I'm also not considering the resources needed to manufacture, transport, and maintain the PV panels. Similar considerations apply to wind power. Solar and wind have different advantages. Fewer acres of solar than wind are required for each MW of capacity (10 versus 32), but for each MW capacity of wind, you get more kWh/year (3 million as compared to 1.5 million). That is because you are never, ever, going to average more than 12 hours daily of solar. However, you might average more than that for wind, depending on location and circumstances. Megawhat? A solar panel rated at one kilowatt of capacity will produce one kilowatt-hour of energy if the sun shines on it steadily for an hour. Terms like megawatt, kilowatt, and watt express power or capacity, while megawatt-hour, kilowatt-hour, and watt-hour measure energy. A kilowatt is a thousand watts; a megawatt is a million watts or a thousand kilowatts. At the scale necessary to power data centers, solar, wind, and even bicycle power involve considerable habitat loss. Bicycle space to power the 2010 US Internet would be about 4304 square miles (about the size of the Everglades). For the 2010 world Internet, about the combined area of Delaware and Connecticut. When chunks of ecosystem are shoveled into industrialism's mill, Gaia is diminished. Acres sacrificed to solar arrays, wind farms, power line rights of way, or thousands of bicycle generator pads destroy habitat no less than those given over to GMO crops, cooling ponds, interstate highways, and parking lots. Energy-intensive, thy name is Internet *How can the Internet use so much electricity? Suppose you have an awesome video of your cat at a laptop using her little cat feet to scroll through online celebrity cats in fetching poses. (Click for full screen.) It's stored in your email account, and you have a copy on your laptop and/or handheld. Your email is backed up by the company that offers it, and you have backup service for your laptop, so that's more Internet storage space on servers somewhere; then the back-up companies back up their back-ups. You send the cat video to 50 people. Some store it in their emails; some download it and have it backed up on their own online backup systems; some send it out to a few other people; and some do all three. How many places can we find the cat? It's a hall of mirrors, a grain of wheat doubling on each square of a chessboard. All of it eats kilowatt-hours. How much fracking is that cat porn worth to you?* * All online content is not born equal. It takes very little electricity to support text, even italics. Graphics such as photos and drawings are much more energy-intensive. Music exceeds even graphics, and video (bouncing bunnies, or time-lapse wrinkle cream results) is the greediest of all. * *Online action is hosted and processed in massive data centers that use up to 100 or even 200 MW of demand; data center operators are not often eager to release this information. Chicago's Lakeside Technology Center (a data center) reportedly draws 100 MW, a higher electric demand than any other Commonwealth Edison customer except O'Hare airport. A quick check reveals what a "renewable" electricity supply would look like for a facility like this. With bike generators: over a million generators, over four million pedalers, and almost half a million acres, which is 757 square miles (almost three times the size of Chicago). Probably not available anywhere near the Loop. Using solar panels: 2917 acres (2210 football fields), not counting battery space, which is also probably not in the Chicago zoning plan. Using wind in the "windy city": 9347 acres (or 7081 football fields), again not counting battery space.* *As Alex Roslin of the Montreal Gazette put it, if the Internet were a country, it would be the fifth biggest power consumer, ahead of India & Germany.* [7] Who is paying for this? Tax breaks and other subsidies are common for data centers. Even modest-sized ones often reap government subsidies for drawing huge amounts of electricity and providing fewer jobs per buck, or per kWh, than almost any other kind of facility. For instance, in 2007 a Google Inc. data center got tax breaks on utility bills, plus a property tax exemption. *Iowa'*s own web site describes the tax exemption as including "cooling systems, cooling towers, and other temperature control infrastructure.... also exempt from property tax are all power infrastructure for transformation, distribution, or management of electricity used for the maintenance and operation of the web search portal, including but not limited to exterior dedicated business owned substations, back-up power generation systems, battery systems, and related infrastructure; and racking systems, cabling, and trays, which are necessary for the maintenance and operation of the web search portal." Iowa even calculated its expected tax losses: $3.6 million in 2009, $12.7 million in 2010, $22 million in 2011, and $32.7 million in 2012. The corporation got a similar deal in North Carolina, where estimates of tax losses to the state were approximately $97 million over 30 years. *Lack of enforcement of environmental and occupational safety laws across the board is an often-overlooked form of subsidy available to large corporations, including data centers. This includes the cradle-to-grave production, processing, transport, and use of nuclear and fossil fuels, as well as the toxic waste and byproducts of same. Companies burn through energy and resources far more cheaply than would be possible if laws "on the books" were enforced.* Finally, there are those bargain-basement electricity bills. Data center *electricity rates* are as low as 3–4¢/kWh, while residential customers pay much higher rates: easily 15, 20, 25¢/kWh, and even steeper when charges for distribution and other fees are included. [8] *The public is massively subsidizing data centers, the Internet, and the profits of IT corporations. Yet, many corporations with huge data centers are not eager to advertise their locations, and use third parties to negotiate their deals. Some go to great lengths to hide their electricity use. In 2007, for example, at Google Inc.'s urging, Oklahoma rewrote its open records law to allow data center owners to conceal from the public the amount of electricity used.* If inefficiency is not the problem, efficiency is not the solution When I raise the issue of the massive electricity use of all things Internet, everyone tells me how efficient IT is becoming. *The idea that efficiency reduces consumption is at best debatable, and at worst a public relations scam. As Don Fitz wrote in "Why Energy Efficiency Isn't Reducing Consumption" (Synthesis/Regeneration 50:30, 2009), over a century and a half of research on the relationship between efficiency and consumption of a resource has marshaled considerable evidence that the opposite is true. Since Stanley Jevons documented that coal consumption increased 10-fold after smelters tripled their efficiency (The Coal Question, 1865), the phenomenon has been called the Jevons Paradox. Historically, in capitalist systems, increased efficiency has led to more consumption, not less.* Being efficient is good, but it does not mean sustainable, it does not mean green, and it does not portend reduced consumption. Data center efficiency is improving, and Google Inc.'s are reputed to be among the best. *But when Gaia is diminished by the ripping out of coal and the dumping of sludge, her suffering is in no way reduced if the resulting electricity is used "efficiently." Earth's problem is not the inefficiency of resource use, but the quantity. Ask Gaia*. Food, internet, spam Why do we figure out the ecological implications of eating a hamburger but not clicking a search? When it comes to food, the green or even greenish band of the political spectrum is all over it. Local food. Organic food. Slow food. Urban agriculture. Permaculture. Rooftop gardens. Alice Waters, Will Allen, Michael Pollan. "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." Fast food nation. Eat low on the food chain. But *when it comes to the Internet, people spout shallow unexamined cliches as they tap at sleek, shiny gadgets. The PV panels at Google Inc.'s headquarters and other cheap stunts deflect attention from the enormity of Internet energy use*. Engineering Professor Mohamed Cheriet, at Montreal's Ecole de Technologie Superieure, who works on "green" IT innovation, gushes, "We've found the key to the problem: Follow the wind, follow the sun." [9] The Internet is the fast food triple bacon cheeseburger of communications, yet people are convinced it's green. *Are the brains who figured out it takes 150 or 630 or 1300 gallons of water to produce a hamburger just out to lunch when it comes to the Internet? Why is the Internet—a global system if there ever was one—immune from the same analysis? Spending two hours on the porch showing your neighbor your family photo album is not especially energy-intensive. Doing so online, and sending it around to everyone on your email list, carries vastly higher ecological costs. * File Size Matters A text-only file of the Bible is approximately 1.5 MB. With pictures, depending on how elaborate, it is closer to 100 MB. A 2-hour video about the greatest story ever told would use up more like 1-1.5 GB. Comparing music and video, a 4-minute video would use about 24 MB, while 4 minutes of music would use only about 4 MB. What's the actual content that billions of publicly subsidized kWh go to support? Nicholas Carr (The Big Switch, 2008) estimated in 1996 that 94% of all emails are spam, and that there may be 85 billion spams a day. This year, John Markoff in the New York Times claimed that about *90% of all email is still spam*, and that one single spam campaign generated three emails for each person on the planet, some 21 billion messages. Ken Auletta (Googled, 2009) suggested that *as many as a quarter of all searches are for porn*. According to Alex Roslin at the Montreal Gazette, 250 billion emails are sent daily. [10] The study Markoff referenced suggested that over 12 million messages were needed to sell $100 of Viagra. [11] Dennis Walsh from green at work, among others, states that over 200 million Internet searches happen daily in the US alone; 100 million photos are uploaded daily. Google Inc. has reported that it carries out about a billion searches per day, according to James Glanz in the New York Times. [12] One person estimated that *fantasy football* aficionados spent 2.4 billion hours online per season. [13] Online games, role-playing, social networking, gambling, and an almost unbelievable amount of advertising are up there in the "cloud" at tremendous energy cost. Much of it is not the relatively energy-cheap text, but the photos, music, video, bouncing cartoons, and interactive click-fests that are hundreds or thousands of times more energy-intensive. Subsidizing the entire current Internet system because an activist can upload photos of strip mining and clearcutting is like subsidizing an industrial-sized Wal-Mart because six feet of shelf space holds organic spinach. The Internet is not, and will not be, powered by so-called renewable energy, magical energy that is somehow without consequences. Sleek, glowing screens may hide the truth from people who don't want to hear about it, but the consequences remain. The real costs of Internet electricity use are being cast over state boundaries and national borders, across class, ethnic, and species lines, and onto future generations. In hindsight, most wish that we had used a little more foresight about the automobile. Today is a good time to look up from our screens and take advantage of the fact that we are still in the Model T era of the Internet. *If we keep pretending that the Internet is innocuous, neutral, democratic, clean, and green, we can look forward to more iPipelines, iFracking, iMountaintop Removal, iCoal Plants, iNukes, iStripmining, iSpecies Extinction, iHabitat Loss, iClimate Change, iTar Sands, iSludge, iOil spills, iFloods, and continued iResource Wars.* Or, we can begin to give it the attention we give a burger. ------------------------- *Corporate anthropologist Jane Anne Morris (democracythemepark.org), whose most recent book is Gaveling Down the Rabble: How "Free Trade" is Stealing Our Democracy (Apex/Rowman & Littlefield, 2008), first wrote about Internet energy use in "The Energy Nightmare of Web Server Farms: Feet in the Cloud, Head in the Sand," Synthesis/Regeneration: A Magazine of Green Social Thought, Winter 2008 (here).* *Notes* 1. 400 watts/server, for 8760 hours, would be 3,504,000 watt hours, or 3500 kWh a year necessary for one server. 2. Assume 4 pedalers (6-hour shifts) for each bike generator. 57,600 sq. ft in a football field, or 1.32 acres, including end zones. 43,560 feet per acre. 20,000,000 divided by 57,600 is 200,000 divided by 576 which is 347.22 or 347 football fields. In acres it is 459.136. (200,000 generators, 800,000 pedalers, twenty million square feet). 3. David Sarokin, untitled blog answer, Sat. Aug. 18, 2007, estimating "electricity consumption for the Internet," with assumptions and discussion. This same DS estimated world usage at that time as 868 billion kWh/year. Sarokin data includes pc's, modems, etc. 4. Rich Miller, Google's Energy Story: High Efficiency, Huge Scale, September 8, 2011, Data Center Knowledge website datacenterknowledge.com, quoting a report by Jon Koomey, whose estimate for 2010 was 198.8 billion kWh, worldwide, for Internet use. I rounded that to 200 billion kWh. 5. I looked up the major solar PV projects in the world and took a rough average. 117 billion kWh divided by 96 million per square mile yields the number of square miles =1218.75 = 1219 square miles; 117 billion divided by 1.5 million kWh/yr yields number of megawatts = 78,000 MW. 6. I looked up the major wind projects in the world and took a rough average. 20 MW per sq. mile, 3 million kWh per MW, so 60 million kWh per sq mile, so would need 117 divided by 60 = 1950 square miles. 7. Alex Roslin (Postmedia News), Could the Net be killing the planet one web search at a time? in the Montreal Gazette, June 3, 2011. 8. One source for this is Ron Starner, Is Energy Still Oklahoma's Trump Card? Site Selection Online, July 2007. 9. Alex Roslin, Dirty Data: The Internet's Giant Carbon Footprint, June 4, 2011, Montreal Gazette. 10. Alex Roslin (Postmedia News), Could the Net... Montreal Gazette June 3, 2011. 11. John Markoff, Study Sees Way to Win Spam Fight, NYT , May 20, 2011. 12. James Glanz, Google Details, and Defends, Its Use of Electricity, NYT, Sept. 9, 2011. 13. http://www.joulex.net/Green_IT_Blog/bid/58292/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Tue Oct 2 10:45:20 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 23:45:20 +0900 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku Message-ID: Dear list, We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. izumi -------------- 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 From iliya.bazlyankov at uninet.bg Tue Oct 2 11:29:38 2012 From: iliya.bazlyankov at uninet.bg (Iliya Bazlyankov) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 18:29:38 +0300 Subject: [governance] Host website for the first Bulgarian IGF discussions In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <506B0862.1070304@uninet.bg> Dear Colleagues, We are organizing the first Bulgarian IGF discussions on 16 November, together with the annual Domain Forum meeting. The registration is now open at the host website (http://www.domainforum.bg), and the draft agenda is published at http://www.domainforum.bg/draft-agenda-igf/ You are more than welcome to join us in Sofia for the event. Best regards, Iliya Bazlyankov -------------- 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 From glaser at cgi.br Tue Oct 2 11:31:21 2012 From: glaser at cgi.br (Hartmut Richard Glaser) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 12:31:21 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... ============================== On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > -------------- 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 From graciela at nupef.org.br Tue Oct 2 13:20:22 2012 From: graciela at nupef.org.br (Graciela Selaimen) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:20:22 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> Message-ID: <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> +1! best, Graciela Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: > > Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... > > ============================== > On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> Dear list, >> >> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >> >> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >> >> izumi >> > > -- Graciela Selaimen Instituto Nupef www.nupef.org.br www.politics.org.br www.rets.org.br www.tiwa.org.br -------------- 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 From andrespiazza at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 13:32:42 2012 From: andrespiazza at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9s_Piazza?=) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:32:42 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: +1 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen > +1! > > best, > Graciela > > Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: > > >> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >> >> ============================== >> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >>> Dear list, >>> >>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>> >>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> >> >> > -- > Graciela Selaimen > Instituto Nupef > www.nupef.org.br > www.politics.org.br > www.rets.org.br > www.tiwa.org.br > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Andrés Piazza* www.andrespiazza.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 13:37:28 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 13:37:28 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: Good choice :-) Deirdre On 2 October 2012 13:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: > +1 > > 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen > >> +1! >> >> best, >> Graciela >> >> Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >> >> >>> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >>> >>> ============================== >>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>> >>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Graciela Selaimen >> Instituto Nupef >> www.nupef.org.br >> www.politics.org.br >> www.rets.org.br >> www.tiwa.org.br >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > *Andrés Piazza* > www.andrespiazza.com > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From valeriab at apc.org Tue Oct 2 13:39:45 2012 From: valeriab at apc.org (Valeria Betancourt) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 12:39:45 -0500 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: <2B3A777C-D73F-47E8-938E-44B0EF9F8902@apc.org> + 1 Valeria On 02/10/2012, at 12:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: > +1 > > 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen > +1! > > best, > Graciela > > Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: > > > Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... > > ============================== > On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > > > > > -- > Graciela Selaimen > Instituto Nupef > www.nupef.org.br > www.politics.org.br > www.rets.org.br > www.tiwa.org.br > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > Andrés Piazza > www.andrespiazza.com > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 13:52:35 2012 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:52:35 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <2B3A777C-D73F-47E8-938E-44B0EF9F8902@apc.org> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <2B3A777C-D73F-47E8-938E-44B0EF9F8902@apc.org> Message-ID: +1 Ivar On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: > + 1 > > Valeria > > On 02/10/2012, at 12:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: > > +1 > > 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen > >> +1! >> >> best, >> Graciela >> >> Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >> >> >>> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >>> >>> ============================== >>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>> >>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Graciela Selaimen >> Instituto Nupef >> www.nupef.org.br >> www.politics.org.br >> www.rets.org.br >> www.tiwa.org.br >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > *Andrés Piazza* > www.andrespiazza.com > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 14:19:19 2012 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 13:19:19 -0500 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: +1 for Carlos Afonso, and with the suggestion that Sala be our other speaker. Cheers, Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 2 October 2012 12:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: > +1 > > 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen > >> +1! >> >> best, >> Graciela >> >> Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >> >> >>> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >>> >>> ============================== >>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>> >>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Graciela Selaimen >> Instituto Nupef >> www.nupef.org.br >> www.politics.org.br >> www.rets.org.br >> www.tiwa.org.br >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > *Andrés Piazza* > www.andrespiazza.com > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 14:22:24 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:22:24 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <2B3A777C-D73F-47E8-938E-44B0EF9F8902@apc.org> Message-ID: Izumi - you yourself. Deirdre On 2 October 2012 13:52, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > +1 > Ivar > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: > >> + 1 >> >> Valeria >> >> On 02/10/2012, at 12:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen >> >>> +1! >>> >>> best, >>> Graciela >>> >>> Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >>> >>> >>>> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >>>> >>>> ============================== >>>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear list, >>>>> >>>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>>> >>>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>>> >>>>> izumi >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> Graciela Selaimen >>> Instituto Nupef >>> www.nupef.org.br >>> www.politics.org.br >>> www.rets.org.br >>> www.tiwa.org.br >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> *Andrés Piazza* >> www.andrespiazza.com >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From fatimacambronero at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 14:32:21 2012 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com (Fatima Cambronero) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:32:21 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <2B3A777C-D73F-47E8-938E-44B0EF9F8902@apc.org> Message-ID: +1 for Carlos Afonso. Fatima 2012/10/2 Deirdre Williams > Izumi - you yourself. > Deirdre > > > On 2 October 2012 13:52, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > >> +1 >> Ivar >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: >> >>> + 1 >>> >>> Valeria >>> >>> On 02/10/2012, at 12:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen >>> >>>> +1! >>>> >>>> best, >>>> Graciela >>>> >>>> Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >>>>> >>>>> ============================== >>>>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Dear list, >>>>>> >>>>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>>>> >>>>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>>>> >>>>>> izumi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> -- >>>> Graciela Selaimen >>>> Instituto Nupef >>>> www.nupef.org.br >>>> www.politics.org.br >>>> www.rets.org.br >>>> www.tiwa.org.br >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Andrés Piazza* >>> www.andrespiazza.com >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Fatima Cambronero* Abogada-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter: @facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero *Join the LACRALO/ICANN discussions:* https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es *Join the Diplo Internet Governance Community discussions:* http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/ *Join to the Internet Society (ISOC): *http://www.internetsociety.org/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Tue Oct 2 15:13:39 2012 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:13:39 -0300 Subject: RES: [governance] Host website for the first Bulgarian IGF discussions In-Reply-To: <506B0862.1070304@uninet.bg> References: <506B0862.1070304@uninet.bg> Message-ID: <022b01cda0d2$106f0520$314d0f60$@uol.com.br> Thank you Yliya for sharing. Success! Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados IT Trend Avenida Paulista 1159 cj 1004 01311-200 São Paulo,SP, Brasil Tel + 5511 3266.6253 Mob + 5511 98181.1464 Dissemine esta idéia: Digite o dominio ao inves do telefone. Domain dialing www.siter.com -----Mensagem original----- De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Iliya Bazlyankov Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 12:30 Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Assunto: [governance] Host website for the first Bulgarian IGF discussions Dear Colleagues, We are organizing the first Bulgarian IGF discussions on 16 November, together with the annual Domain Forum meeting. The registration is now open at the host website (http://www.domainforum.bg), and the draft agenda is published at http://www.domainforum.bg/draft-agenda-igf/ You are more than welcome to join us in Sofia for the event. Best regards, Iliya Bazlyankov -------------- 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 From jumaropi at yahoo.com Tue Oct 2 15:15:18 2012 From: jumaropi at yahoo.com (Juan Manuel Rojas) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 12:15:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <2B3A777C-D73F-47E8-938E-44B0EF9F8902@apc.org> Message-ID: <1349205318.1020.YahooMailNeo@web141103.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> +1 Carlos Afonso   JUAN MANUEL ROJAS Comunicador Social   Presidente - AGEIA DENSI Colombia Twitter: @JmanuRojas Unete a LACRALO:  https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es                                                   ________________________________ De: Fatima Cambronero Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams CC: iza at anr.org Enviado: Martes, 2 de octubre, 2012 1:32 P.M. Asunto: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku +1 for Carlos Afonso. Fatima 2012/10/2 Deirdre Williams Izumi - you yourself. >Deirdre > > > >On 2 October 2012 13:52, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > >+1 >>Ivar >> >> >> >>On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Valeria Betancourt wrote: >> >>+ 1 >>> >>>Valeria >>> >>> >>>On 02/10/2012, at 12:32, Andrés Piazza wrote: >>> >>>+1 >>>> >>>> >>>>2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen >>>> >>>>+1! >>>>> >>>>>best, >>>>>Graciela >>>>> >>>>>Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >>>>>> >>>>>>============================== >>>>>>On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>Dear list, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>>>>>I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>izumi >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>Graciela Selaimen >>>>>Instituto Nupef >>>>>www.nupef.org.br >>>>>www.politics.org.br >>>>>www.rets.org.br >>>>>www.tiwa.org.br >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>____________________________________________________________ >>>>>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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>-- >>>>Andrés Piazza >>>>www.andrespiazza.com >>>>____________________________________________________________ >>>>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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>____________________________________________________________ >>>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 >>> >>> >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>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 >> >> > > > >-- > >“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > -- Fatima Cambronero Abogada-Argentina Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 Twitter: @facambronero Skype: fatima.cambronero Join the LACRALO/ICANN discussions: https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es  Join the Diplo Internet Governance Community discussions: http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/  Join to the Internet Society (ISOC): http://www.internetsociety.org/ ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From thiagotavares at safernet.org.br Tue Oct 2 17:02:46 2012 From: thiagotavares at safernet.org.br (Thiago Tavares Nunes de Oliveira) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 18:02:46 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: <15177927-D3AA-48A1-9869-D3A9F9BE7E31@safernet.org.br> +1 Carlos Afonso (CA) all the best, Thiago Tavares SaferNet Brasil Em 02/10/2012, às 14:20, Graciela Selaimen escreveu: > +1! > > best, > Graciela > > Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: >> >> Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... >> >> ============================== >> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> Dear list, >>> >>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>> >>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>> >>> izumi >>> >> >> > > -- > Graciela Selaimen > Instituto Nupef > www.nupef.org.br > www.politics.org.br > www.rets.org.br > www.tiwa.org.br > > > > -- > Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivírus da > SaferNet e acredita-se estar livre de perigo. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -- Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo sistema de antivírus da SaferNet e acredita-se estar livre de perigo. -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Tue Oct 2 17:10:27 2012 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:10:27 -0700 Subject: AW: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net>,<506AA0EB.5080003@gmail.com> Message-ID: <506B5843.1060506@cavebear.com> On 10/02/2012 02:00 AM, Kettemann, Matthias (matthias.kettemann at uni-graz.at) wrote: > @ Karl >> I rather take a rather different position, which is that >> stakeholderism is oligarchy and not democratic at all. > Multistakholerdism means - in abstract - that all those who are > touched by the normative outcomes of a normative process should have > a say in the process. MS can be oligarchic if only some are heard > (because of their position, wealth etc.). But it can be desigend in a > way that avoids this dilemma. There are problems with your formulation. First is the assumption that the internet does not touch every person on this planet. There may be a few that are so detached from at least one-level indirect effect, but vanishingly few. And that number is decreasing every day. We should assume that the number not affected by the internet is essentially zero. Second is the problem that someone must be the god - or king - who gets to measure the degree of "touched by the normative outcomes of a normative process" - in other words, a Chamberlain or gatekeeper who gets to say who gets to participate and who does not. Historically that role has proven to be one of both great power for shaping and controlling the outcome, and usually making a nice profit. When one adopts an exclusionary process, of which stakeholderism is a prime example, one should expect manipulation and exclusion to occur. The world is not a nice halcyon place where everyone places nice late 1960's flower-power games, even though that seems to be the mental model of much of what has passed to date for "Internet Governance". Rather the world is a place of power politics. It is a place for Machiavelli ("The Prince") rather than Heinlein ("Stranger In A Strange Land".) Once one begins to deny the role of democracy - to deny one person, one vote, whether representative or direct - then the system will quickly be captured by those groups that, because they are organizational rather than flesh-and-blood, will be have the resources and time to be ever vigilant, ever present, and very effective at superseding the popular, democratic point of view. One has only to look to the degree to which ICANN has been captured by those it is purported to regulate to see how this can happen. Now, there is value in the opinion and expertise of "stakeholders". There is no reason to bar them from presenting opinions and, if they can be trusted to be objective, information. Here in the US that takes the form of "lobbying" and it is a huge industry that no-one can say is incapable of having a very strong influence. But we don't give stakeholder lobbyists the right to vote. But that is what people are suggesting via the use of "stakeholder" in internet governance. --karl-- -------------- 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 From rguerra at privaterra.org Tue Oct 2 17:14:31 2012 From: rguerra at privaterra.org (Robert Guerra) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 17:14:31 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Colleagues, I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: http://www.katypearce.net/ regards Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Tue Oct 2 17:24:55 2012 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:24:55 -0700 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com > Message-ID: <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has > revoked the 2,500 previous years of political philosophy and history. More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. We have forgotten history. Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. --karl-- -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 17:35:43 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 09:35:43 +1200 Subject: [governance] Social Media and Star Wars #May the force be with you Message-ID: Dear All, I read this with much interest today.This was the US Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, Tara Sonenshine's speech. Cheers, Sala *Message Starts* Remarks for Pacific Council on International Policy Remarks Tara Sonenshine Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs As Prepared for Delivery Los Angeles, CA October 2, 2012 ------------------------------ Thank you Ernie, for that introduction. And my special thanks to the Pacific Council for hosting me, and the Southern California Gas Company for sponsoring the luncheon. Until three weeks ago, I was going to talk to you about social media. The subtitle to that was “The Arab Spring and Beyond.” But developments since then have conspired to make us all expand our understandings of the post-Arab Spring. I mention this to show you how quickly things can change around the world – in large part because of social media. In fact, I would go so far as to say, social media has evolved into the most powerful, galvanizing catalyst of our time – for better and for worse. It is arguably as significant an event in our shared human history as the industrial revolution. Let’s be clear: Social media is a neutral entity. It is the human use of it that matters. It was humans interacting with – or responding to – social media, that contributed significantly to the Arab Spring, and also to the violent protests we saw across the region in the past weeks. To be sure there were other factors: rampant unemployment among young people; autocratic regimes exploiting their citizens and depriving them of any political voice; religious animosity; and so forth. But social media was certainly a leveraging force. In the first instance, we saw social media as a catalyst for largely positive change. In Tunisia, a fruit seller immolated himself to protest the loss of his dignity. Thanks to social media that desperate act led to a revolution that galvanized the region – and set course for a long and bumpy road towards democratization. In the second instance, in the past weeks, we’ve seen violence in many countries – from Khartoum to Cairo, Tunis, and Benghazi – directed at our diplomatic Missions and personnel. Many protestors were outraged by a reprehensible video uploaded here in America. As you know, the United States Government had nothing to do with the video, and soundly condemned its message and content. Many in the region did not understand the freedom of expression that we have here, and responded with outrage. But, I should note, many more did not take to the streets. Relatively small crowds in a handful of countries drew the headlines, rather than the “silent majorities” who stayed home. Since we are in LA, let me use a movie metaphor – and I don’t think it’s so off base. Social media is like the Force in “Star Wars.” At almost every point of the way, the prospect of good or bad looms large. It all depends on the humans using it. In the case of the Arab Spring, social media was – largely – a force of good. In the latter case, it went to the dark side. Today, I want to talk about why it’s so important to use it as a force for good – and what the State Department is doing to make that happen. First, let me share a few facts about social media. Every second, one hour of video is uploaded to YouTube. Every two hours, that total becomes nine months’ worth. By the end of every single day, the equivalent of a decade is uploaded every day. Now listen to this: Every 10 days, a whole century is uploaded. I am going to quote from an article written by James K. Glassman – one of my predecessors as Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy. In the past four years, the number of Facebook accounts worldwide has increased sevenfold – and there has been significant growth in countries critical to U.S. security. In Egypt, there were 800,000 Facebook accounts in mid-2008; today, there are 12 million. In Pakistan, the increase has gone from 250,000 to 7 million; in Turkey, from 3 million to 31 million. Twitter, which barely existed in 2008, is growing even faster. These quantum leaps in connection technologies are changing, literally, everything. People are consuming and producing information in profoundly different ways. Political and cultural movements have become transnational. In short, power is decentralizing. More people are playing a role in international relations than ever. Secretary Clinton has called upon all of us to adopt and institutionalize 21st Century Statecraft, so we can remain at the forefront of the world’s most vibrant conversations. By listening and responding through social media, we can create a vibrant two-way dialogue with the world in ways we never have before. But there are challenges. As we have seen, the effect of social media on human nature – and vice versa – has serious consequences. In these Internet-influenced times, we are in the business of fighting for attention – and responding ever more quickly. In the case of Twitter, we have to do it all in the space of 140 characters [or less.] Imagine how many things can go wrong with up to seven billion global citizens – all thumb-texting from the hip. It boggles the mind. As a government and, frankly, as everyday citizens – we have to fight rumor with facts, meet tyrannical outbursts with calm arguments about freedom, and in general, speak to the best in all people. But in the 21st century, no one is waiting for us to play catch up. We have to respond in real time, with frequency, at speed – and get it right. In the case of Libya and its aftermath, we are working to do just that. We are engaging audiences everywhere about our staunch belief in freedom of expression – and our unbreakable position on religious tolerance. In fact, Secretary Clinton just released an important video on Youtube expressing those ideas. And if I can, I’d like to share the link with everyone. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X5TP4fQos8&feature=youtu.be ] As President Obama says on that video: in the United States, we see no contradiction between our strong religious beliefs and our defense of those who would utter the worst blasphemies against them. The point is: we need to be out there at the reactive end – presenting our counter argument to the false, the hateful and the cynical. We do that through our Center for Strategic Counter Terrorism Communications, where we actively engage online with targeted groups where not only jihadists – but the more persuadable audiences are present. When we enter that digital space and challenge their messages, we force the uncommitted to pay attention to a different point of view. We engage proactively, with audiences of young people, women and girls, and other underserved communities to reinforce their most positive aspirations. We also work to redirect them from voices that would convert their frustrations as well as hopes and dreams for negative, extremist purposes. Recently, I wrote a blog posting on our State Department website. I spoke about the great social media toolbox that we use in so many ways to reach out. U.S. Ambassadors are introducing themselves to citizens through video messages broadcast online and via local media. They are holding web chats with the public. And it has become practically unthinkable for them not to have a Twitter account. In fact Ambassador Roos’ Twitter feeds during the earthquake disaster in Japan became one of the most widely used information resources during that period. And in Madagascar, when rumors were mounting that the former President had hidden himself in our embassy after he was deposed, our Embassy’s Twitter feed helped to quash them – and reduce tensions. We are even connecting with foreign publics in non-permissive environments, such as Cuba or Iran, through our virtual embassies and SMS text campaigns The traditional State Department briefing podium is not gone. In fact, it matters more than ever – and we are giving it new amplification power. Our State Department social media accounts and those of our embassies disseminate press briefings, speeches, media notes, videos, and online materials everywhere. We are conducting virtual press conferences with journalists on every continent through our "LiveAtState" program. We have U.S. International Media Hubs working across the world to communicate our messages and help explain U.S. policy. Beyond the podium, we recognize that speaking with people, and listening to them, is an integral part of the policy process. That is the essence of public diplomacy. Just three months ago, we had 10 million followers on our various Facebook pages. We now have 15 million, including the Our Planet page – and pages in Arabic, Persian, Russian, Spanish, and French. Our Embassy in Pakistan has over 500,000 Facebook fans, and the Mission uses this platform as part of its outreach strategy to amplify messages. So you can see how fast we are growing. We reach out to hundreds of thousands of people every single day through exchange programs, roundtables, and outreach to religious scholars and NGO leaders, businesspeople and entrepreneurs, students and educational advisors. Many people do not realize this, but we have more than 800 “American Spaces” around the world. These spaces – whether they are corners in libraries or rooms at binational centers – give foreign citizens the chance to learn English. They can meet and interact with American subject-matter experts. They can find information on study abroad opportunities in the U.S. All of this can be particularly effective in countries where Internet access is limited or restricted. And here in the United States, we hold discussions with students across the United States through our Foreign Policy Classrooms program. The result of these efforts is a more informed, more engaged, and global citizenry, which is vital to the long-terms interests of the United States from the vantage point of economic prosperity and security. In short, public diplomacy goes on, despite all the vicissitudes of global events. We are communicating and engaging every second of every day. As the pioneer of public diplomacy Edward R. Murrow, once said, we are working to close that crucial link: the last three feet. In that spirit – a two-way conversation – I am anxious to hear from you. So let me sum up what I have said. Social media is a neutral tool. It is a challenge and an opportunity. If left to irresponsible and cynical voices, it can create divisions. If used in positive ways, it can bring people together. We know which side of that divide we stand on – and we are working every day to make sure we push that positive agenda. Let me also say this: government is not the only agent in this. Far from it. It is people like you: students, global citizens, people of conscience, who can share positive information and create positive networks. By working together and using social media as a tool of positive communication, we can win the battle for the best in humanity. Right now, and in the near future, I look forward to hearing from all of you about the ways we can continue to do that. Thank you. *The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein.* -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 17:47:39 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 17:47:39 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: Reviewing the suggestions up to now it seems important that we should observe the two Gs - Gender and Geography. Robert suggests someone who is an expert ON Azerbaijan, but considering the precedent set last year in Nairobi would it be possible to choose someone FROM Azerbaijan, or at least from that part of the world? Deirdre On 2 October 2012 17:14, Robert Guerra wrote: > Colleagues, > > > I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts > for the Baku main session. > > Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very > well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent > resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and > understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > > I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is > available at her website: > > http://www.katypearce.net/ > > > regards > > Robert > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > > > On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear list, > > > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > > > izumi > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From katycarvt at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 17:52:44 2012 From: katycarvt at gmail.com (Katy P) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:52:44 -0700 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: I can think of a number of good speakers from Azerbaijan but it is also important that we can assure their safety. How widely publicized will this be? Will this be a focal point of the event? What sort of topics are you all interested in? On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > Reviewing the suggestions up to now it seems important that we should > observe the two Gs - Gender and Geography. Robert suggests someone who is an > expert ON Azerbaijan, but considering the precedent set last year in Nairobi > would it be possible to choose someone FROM Azerbaijan, or at least from > that part of the world? > Deirdre > > On 2 October 2012 17:14, Robert Guerra wrote: >> >> Colleagues, >> >> >> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts >> for the Baku main session. >> >> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very >> well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent >> resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand >> Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. >> >> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is >> available at her website: >> >> http://www.katypearce.net/ >> >> >> regards >> >> Robert >> -- >> R. Guerra >> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >> >> >> >> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> > Dear list, >> > >> > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >> > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >> > >> > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >> > >> > izumi >> > >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From julian at colnodo.apc.org Tue Oct 2 17:56:21 2012 From: julian at colnodo.apc.org (Julian Casasbuenas G.) Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 16:56:21 -0500 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> Message-ID: <506B6305.9010002@colnodo.apc.org> +1 El 02/10/12 12:32, Andrés Piazza escribió: > +1 > > 2012/10/2 Graciela Selaimen > > > +1! > > best, > Graciela > > Em 10/2/12 12:31 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser escreveu: > > > Carlos Afonso from Brazil .... > > ============================== > On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main > session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing > session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > > > > > -- > Graciela Selaimen > Instituto Nupef > www.nupef.org.br > www.politics.org.br > www.rets.org.br > www.tiwa.org.br > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > *Andrés Piazza* > www.andrespiazza.com -- Julian Casasbuenas G. Director Colnodo Diagonal 40A (Antigua Av. 39) No. 14-75, Bogota, Colombia Tel: 57-1-2324246, Cel. 57-315-3339099 Fax: 57-1-3380264 Twitter @jcasasbuenas www.colnodo.apc.org - Uso Estratégico de Internet para el Desarrollo Miembro de la Asociacion para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones -APC- www.apc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Tue Oct 2 17:58:51 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 23:58:51 +0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <15177927-D3AA-48A1-9869-D3A9F9BE7E31@safernet.org.br> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <15177927-D3AA-48A1-9869-D3A9F9BE7E31@safernet.org.br> Message-ID: +1 for Carlos Afonso (CA) Louis - - - On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Thiago Tavares Nunes de Oliveira < thiagotavares at safernet.org.br> wrote: > +1 Carlos Afonso (CA) > > all the best, > Thiago Tavares > SaferNet Brasil > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Oct 2 18:10:10 2012 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 08:10:10 +1000 Subject: [governance] The Bicycle-Powered Internet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Riaz, The subject is serious, but the article is silly in several respects. Firstly, most estimates put Internet power usage at about 2% of global totals. I have seen some higher figures, but none suggesting more than 10%. So there are some significant other targets out there. But as regards Internet itself ­ no, we don¹t need to all hop on bikes to have a more energy-neutral Internet. In fact a zero carbon emission Internet is possible ­ see writings of Bill St Arnaud and others on this. Solar is useful, whatever the article says. As is wind. Even if relocation of data centres near renewable energy centres only reduces power consumption by 50%, that¹s a significant saving both ecologically and economically. So very do-able. And I don¹t think we need to be too clever in an Internet on which the sun never sets to redirect some traffic to areas wherever the sun Is shining at that point of time to reduce carbon emissions. Then there is hydro and hydrothermal. There is no reason not to relocate all data centres in the world to Iceland to take advantage of their resources. (I think I suggested this at IGF Rio) So there is lots we can (and should) do ­ we don¹t have to stop using the Internet or download smaller files to make significant progress here. Ian Peter From: Riaz K Tayob Reply-To: , Riaz K Tayob Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 16:17:24 +0300 To: Subject: [governance] The Bicycle-Powered Internet?   http://www.greens.org/s-r/59/59-06.html Eat, Sleep, Click: The Bicycle-Powered Internet by Jane Anne Morris Save a tree, bank online. Subscribe online, reduce your carbon footprint. Listen to music online, watch movies online, read books online. No mess, no fuss. Google Inc. has photovoltaic (PV) solar panels on its headquarters. With all that footprint-lightening, you may soon be down to no ecological footprint at all, right? Since everyone wants the Internet to have a gentle footprint and not be "evil," we should power it with green electricity. Start with a bicycle generator and a server. Here are some back-of-the-envelope figures. All the stuff on the Internet, or in the "cloud," is kept aloft by computers called servers (plus routers and so on). An average server draws 400 watts/hour, half of that for cooling (fairly typical), and 3500 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, [1] because it never shuts down. A healthy biker can produce a constant 100 watts/hour on a bicycle generator, a generous estimate. Four generator bikes at 100 watts/hour apiece would power a server. Alas, that single server can't accomplish much by itself. Various techies have estimated that a single online search activates between 1000 and 20,000 servers, often located all over the world. Numerous servers are housed together in places called server farms or data centers. To power a modest-sized data center (50,000 servers) by bicycle power would require almost a million pedalers and an area equivalent to 347 football fields. [2] Data centers can be as small as closets at the back of a business, or as large as several football fields and use as much electricity as small cities. They run 24/7/365, and tend to have multipl redundant backup systems, so no one has to wait 10 seconds to learn from a web site if it's raining outside. What finally matters is not this or that server or data center, but the overall Internet electricity use. How much bicycle power would it take to run the Internet? Later we can figure out how to landscape the facility, and decide where to put the snack bars and port-a-potties. The EPA's conservative and dated number for 2006 Internet electricity use within the US alone is 60 billion kWh. Getting that much electricity from the setup described above would require 600 million bike generators. Assuming 6-hour pedaling shifts, that would take 2.4 billion pedalers. Think of the stimulus to the global economy: pedaling jobs for the entire populations of the US (305 million), Canada (33 million), Mexico (110 million), South America (382 million), India (1.5 billion), and Japan (127 million). Five years later, that number has doubled (at least). It is widely claimed that in 2010 the Internet used 3% of US electricity (3884 billion kWh), which is 117 billion kWh. So, we're now talking about 1.2 billion bike generators and 4.8 billion pedalers. In 2007, an independent outsider who is not on the dole of the IT industry calculated that US Internet energy use was around 350 billion kWh annually, approximately six times the EPA's 2006 estimate, [3] and three times the conservative 2010 estimate used above. I will use the lower numbers, but actual Internet electricity use may be much higher. What about worldwide Internet electricity use? Available 2010 estimates‹200 billion kWh [4] ‹ are probably conservative. Whatâat's that in bicycles? Using the same assumptions as before, that worldwide Internet could be powered by a mere two billion bike generators, with 8 billion people pedaling. (Current world (over)population is 7 billion.) If you placed that many bicycles end-to-end, they would reach far enough for three round trips to the moon, and then a trip back up. Who would want to design a bicycle-generator system to power the Internet? Someone who wanted to imagine a human-scale equivalent for how much energy the Internet already sucks up. What about other "renewable" energy sources? Solar and wind-powered Internet At the biggest, most successful photovoltaic projects in the world, the rule of thumb is that 10 acres of panels produces a megawatt of capacity (as would 10,000 bicycle generators). A square mile (640 acres) could provide 64 MW. Each megawatt might yield 1.5 million kWh/year, so the annual kWh from a square mile of good solar would be 96 million. Generating an annual 117 billion kWh (2010 US Internet use) with solar would require at least 1220 square miles of PV panels, and 78,000 MW. [5] For the 200 billion kWh number for world Internet use, it would take 2081 square miles (that's Delaware) and 133,200 MW. What about a wind-powered Internet? Experience in the wind turbine industry (and again in the choicest spots), has shown that it's good to get 20 MW of capacity per square mile. Three million kWh a year from each megawatt of capacity is also optimistic. Using wind turbines to get that 117 billion kWh for 2010 US Internet electricity use would require 1950 square miles. [6] The 200 billion kWh for 2010 world Internet use would require 3300 square miles. Most wind power sites are less productive than the sites from which these numbers were derived. It's not appropriate to compare solar and wind directly to conventional power plants. Except for maintenance and accidents, coal and nuke plants operate 24/7, though demand drops at night. In contrast, solar is always down at night, and wind is variable, exactly what data centers can't be. With solar, more than half the electricity would have to be stored for use when little or no power is generated. The huge batteries necessary for storing this much power look like a cross between upturned railroad freight cars and electric substations. They require space, maintenance, and cooling. Every time energy is converted from one form to another (like rotating energy to electrical energy to heat energy, or electricity into batteries and then out again) energy is lost. That slippage increases the initial kWh necessary, but I have not factored that in. Also omitted in calculations here are the power lines, substations, maintenance roads, other support facilities, and ladders and buckets of ammonia water to clean PV panels. Not to mention the fact that most areas don't get nearly as much sun as the prize spots already selected for large solar arrays. I'm also not considering the resources needed to manufacture, transport, and maintain the PV panels. Similar considerations apply to wind power. Solar and wind have different advantages. Fewer acres of solar than wind are required for each MW of capacity (10 versus 32), but for each MW capacity of wind, you get more kWh/year (3 million as compared to 1.5 million). That is because you are never, ever, going to average more than 12 hours daily of solar. However, you might average more than that for wind, depending on location and circumstances. Megawhat? A solar panel rated at one kilowatt of capacity will produce one kilowatt-hour of energy if the sun shines on it steadily for an hour. Terms like megawatt, kilowatt, and watt express power or capacity, while megawatt-hour, kilowatt-hour, and watt-hour measure energy. A kilowatt is a thousand watts; a megawatt is a million watts or a thousand kilowatts. At the scale necessary to power data centers, solar, wind, and even bicycle power involve considerable habitat loss. Bicycle space to power the 2010 US Internet would be about 4304 square miles (about the size of the Everglades). For the 2010 world Internet, about the combined area of Delaware and Connecticut. When chunks of ecosystem are shoveled into industrialism's mill, Gaia is diminished. Acres sacrificed to solar arrays, wind farms, power line rights of way, or thousands of bicycle generator pads destroy habitat no less than those given over to GMO crops, cooling ponds, interstate highways, and parking lots. Energy-intensive, thy name is Internet How can the Internet use so much electricity? Suppose you have an awesome video of your cat at a laptop using her little cat feet to scroll through online celebrity cats in fetching poses. (Click for full screen.) It's stored in your email account, and you have a copy on your laptop and/or handheld. Your email is backed up by the company that offers it, and you have backup service for your laptop, so that's more Internet storage space on servers somewhere; then the back-up companies back up their back-ups. You send the cat video to 50 people. Some store it in their emails; some download it and have it backed up on their own online backup systems; some send it out to a few other people; and some do all three. How many places can we find the cat? It's a hall of mirrors, a grain of wheat doubling on each square of a chessboard. All of it eats kilowatt-hours. How much fracking is that cat porn worth to you? All online content is not born equal. It takes very little electricity to support text, even italics. Graphics such as photos and drawings are much more energy-intensive. Music exceeds even graphics, and video (bouncing bunnies, or time-lapse wrinkle cream results) is the greediest of all. Online action is hosted and processed in massive data centers that use up to 100 or even 200 MW of demand; data center operators are not often eager to release this information. Chicago's Lakeside Technology Center (a data center) reportedly draws 100 MW, a higher electric demand than any other Commonwealth Edison customer except O'Hare airport. A quick check reveals what a "renewable" electricity supply would look like for a facility like this. With bike generators: over a million generators, over four million pedalers, and almost half a million acres, which is 757 square miles (almost three times the size of Chicago). Probably not available anywhere near the Loop. Using solar panels: 2917 acres (2210 football fields), not counting battery space, which is also probably not in the Chicago zoning plan. Using wind in the "windy city": 9347 acres (or 7081 football fields), again not counting battery space. As Alex Roslin of the Montreal Gazette put it, if the Internet were a country, it would be the fifth biggest power consumer, ahead of India & Germany. [7] Who is paying for this? Tax breaks and other subsidies are common for data centers. Even modest-sized ones often reap government subsidies for drawing huge amounts of electricity and providing fewer jobs per buck, or per kWh, than almost any other kind of facility. For instance, in 2007 a Google Inc. data center got tax breaks on utility bills, plus a property tax exemption. Iowa's own web site describes the tax exemption as including "cooling systems, cooling towers, and other temperature control infrastructure.... also exempt from property tax are all power infrastructure for transformation, distribution, or management of electricity used for the maintenance and operation of the web search portal, including but not limited to exterior dedicated business owned substations, back-up power generation systems, battery systems, and related infrastructure; and racking systems, cabling, and trays, which are necessary for the maintenance and operation of the web search portal." Iowa even calculated its expected tax losses: $3.6 million in 2009, $12.7 million in 2010, $22 million in 2011, and $32.7 million in 2012. The corporation got a similar deal in North Carolina, where estimates of tax losses to the state were approximately $97 million over 30 years. Lack of enforcement of environmental and occupational safety laws across the board is an often-overlooked form of subsidy available to large corporations, including data centers. This includes the cradle-to-grave production, processing, transport, and use of nuclear and fossil fuels, as well as the toxic waste and byproducts of same. Companies burn through energy and resources far more cheaply than would be possible if laws "on the books" were enforced. Finally, there are those bargain-basement electricity bills. Data center electricity rates are as low as 3­4¢/kWh, while residential customers pay much higher rates: easily 15, 20, 25¢/kWh, and even steeper when charges for distribution and other fees are included. [8] The public is massively subsidizing data centers, the Internet, and the profits of IT corporations. Yet, many corporations with huge data centers are not eager to advertise their locations, and use third parties to negotiate their deals. Some go to great lengths to hide their electricity use. In 2007, for example, at Google Inc.'s urging, Oklahoma rewrote its open records law to allow data center owners to conceal from the public the amount of electricity used. If inefficiency is not the problem, efficiency is not the solution When I raise the issue of the massive electricity use of all things Internet, everyone tells me how efficient IT is becoming. The idea that efficiency reduces consumption is at best debatable, and at worst a public relations scam. As Don Fitz wrote in "Why Energy Efficiency Isn't Reducing Consumption" (Synthesis/Regeneration 50:30, 2009), over a century and a half of research on the relationship between efficiency and consumption of a resource has marshaled considerable evidence that the opposite is true. Since Stanley Jevons documented that coal consumption increased 10-fold after smelters tripled their efficiency (The Coal Question, 1865), the phenomenon has been called the Jevons Paradox. Historically, in capitalist systems, increased efficiency has led to more consumption, not less. Being efficient is good, but it does not mean sustainable, it does not mean green, and it does not portend reduced consumption. Data center efficiency is improving, and Google Inc.'s are reputed to be among the best. But when Gaia is diminished by the ripping out of coal and the dumping of sludge, her suffering is in no way reduced if the resulting electricity is used "efficiently." Earth's problem is not the inefficiency of resource use, but the quantity. Ask Gaia. Food, internet, spam Why do we figure out the ecological implications of eating a hamburger but not clicking a search? When it comes to food, the green or even greenish band of the political spectrum is all over it. Local food. Organic food. Slow food. Urban agriculture. Permaculture. Rooftop gardens. Alice Waters, Will Allen, Michael Pollan. "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants." Fast food nation. Eat low on the food chain. But when it comes to the Internet, people spout shallow unexamined cliches as they tap at sleek, shiny gadgets. The PV panels at Google Inc.'s headquarters and other cheap stunts deflect attention from the enormity of Internet energy use. Engineering Professor Mohamed Cheriet, at Montreal's Ecole de Technologie Superieure, who works on "green" IT innovation, gushes, "We've found the key to the problem: Follow the wind, follow the sun." [9] The Internet is the fast food triple bacon cheeseburger of communications, yet people are convinced it's green. Are the brains who figured out it takes 150 or 630 or 1300 gallons of water to produce a hamburger just out to lunch when it comes to the Internet? Why is the Internet‹a global system if there ever was one‹immune from the same analysis? Spending two hours on the porch showing your neighbor your family photo album is not especially energy-intensive. Doing so online, and sending it around to everyone on your email list, carries vastly higher ecological costs. File Size Matters A text-only file of the Bible is approximately 1.5 MB. With pictures, depending on how elaborate, it is closer to 100 MB. A 2-hour video about the greatest story ever told would use up more like 1-1.5 GB. Comparing music and video, a 4-minute video would use about 24 MB, while 4 minutes of music would use only about 4 MB. What's the actual content that billions of publicly subsidized kWh go to support? Nicholas Carr (The Big Switch, 2008) estimated in 1996 that 94% of all emails are spam, and that there may be 85 billion spams a day. This year, John Markoff in the New York Times claimed that about 90% of all email is still spam, and that one single spam campaign generated three emails for each person on the planet, some 21 billion messages. Ken Auletta (Googled, 2009) suggested that as many as a quarter of all searches are for porn. According to Alex Roslin at the Montreal Gazette, 250 billion emails are sent daily. [10] The study Markoff referenced suggested that over 12 million messages were needed to sell $100 of Viagra. [11] Dennis Walsh from green at work, among others, states that over 200 million Internet searches happen daily in the US alone; 100 million photos are uploaded daily. Google Inc. has reported that it carries out about a billion searches per day, according to James Glanz in the New York Times. [12] One person estimated that fantasy football aficionados spent 2.4 billion hours online per season. [13] Online games, role-playing, social networking, gambling, and an almost unbelievable amount of advertising are up there in the "cloud" at tremendous energy cost. Much of it is not the relatively energy-cheap text, but the photos, music, video, bouncing cartoons, and interactive click-fests that are hundreds or thousands of times more energy-intensive. Subsidizing the entire current Internet system because an activist can upload photos of strip mining and clearcutting is like subsidizing an industrial-sized Wal-Mart because six feet of shelf space holds organic spinach. The Internet is not, and will not be, powered by so-called renewable energy, magical energy that is somehow without consequences. Sleek, glowing screens may hide the truth from people who don't want to hear about it, but the consequences remain. The real costs of Internet electricity use are being cast over state boundaries and national borders, across class, ethnic, and species lines, and onto future generations. In hindsight, most wish that we had used a little more foresight about the automobile. Today is a good time to look up from our screens and take advantage of the fact that we are still in the Model T era of the Internet. If we keep pretending that the Internet is innocuous, neutral, democratic, clean, and green, we can look forward to more iPipelines, iFracking, iMountaintop Removal, iCoal Plants, iNukes, iStripmining, iSpecies Extinction, iHabitat Loss, iClimate Change, iTar Sands, iSludge, iOil spills, iFloods, and continued iResource Wars. Or, we can begin to give it the attention we give a burger. ------------------------- Corporate anthropologist Jane Anne Morris (democracythemepark.org ), whose most recent book is Gaveling Down the Rabble: How "Free Trade" is Stealing Our Democracy (Apex/Rowman & Littlefield, 2008), first wrote about Internet energy use in "The Energy Nightmare of Web Server Farms: Feet in the Cloud, Head in the Sand," Synthesis/Regeneration: A Magazine of Green Social Thought, Winter 2008 (here). Notes 1. 400 watts/server, for 8760 hours, would be 3,504,000 watt hours, or 3500 kWh a year necessary for one server. 2. Assume 4 pedalers (6-hour shifts) for each bike generator. 57,600 sq. ft in a football field, or 1.32 acres, including end zones. 43,560 feet per acre. 20,000,000 divided by 57,600 is 200,000 divided by 576 which is 347.22 or 347 football fields. In acres it is 459.136. (200,000 generators, 800,000 pedalers, twenty million square feet). 3. David Sarokin, untitled blog answer, Sat. Aug. 18, 2007, estimating "electricity consumption for the Internet," with assumptions and discussion. This same DS estimated world usage at that time as 868 billion kWh/year. Sarokin data includes pc's, modems, etc. 4. Rich Miller, Google's Energy Story: High Efficiency, Huge Scale, September 8, 2011, Data Center Knowledge website datacenterknowledge.com , quoting a report by Jon Koomey, whose estimate for 2010 was 198.8 billion kWh, worldwide, for Internet use. I rounded that to 200 billion kWh. 5. I looked up the major solar PV projects in the world and took a rough average. 117 billion kWh divided by 96 million per square mile yields the number of square miles =1218.75 = 1219 square miles; 117 billion divided by 1.5 million kWh/yr yields number of megawatts = 78,000 MW. 6. I looked up the major wind projects in the world and took a rough average. 20 MW per sq. mile, 3 million kWh per MW, so 60 million kWh per sq mile, so would need 117 divided by 60 = 1950 square miles. 7. Alex Roslin (Postmedia News), Could the Net be killing the planet one web search at a time? in the Montreal Gazette, June 3, 2011. 8. One source for this is Ron Starner, Is Energy Still Oklahoma's Trump Card? Site Selection Online, July 2007. 9. Alex Roslin, Dirty Data: The Internet's Giant Carbon Footprint, June 4, 2011, Montreal Gazette. 10. Alex Roslin (Postmedia News), Could the Net... Montreal Gazette June 3, 2011. 11. John Markoff, Study Sees Way to Win Spam Fight, NYT , May 20, 2011. 12. James Glanz, Google Details, and Defends, Its Use of Electricity, NYT, Sept. 9, 2011. 13. http://www.joulex.net/Green_IT_Blog/bid/58292/ ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Tue Oct 2 18:38:21 2012 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 15:38:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <1349217501.34786.YahooMailNeo@web160505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Selection of speakers should be based on ability to speak, knowledge of issues, and involvement/ passion for IGF issues. Giving opportunity to new speakers and ensuring gender and geography is also essential. Shaila   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Deirdre Williams To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Robert Guerra Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:47 PM Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku Reviewing the suggestions up to now it seems important that we should observe the two Gs - Gender and Geography. Robert suggests someone who is an expert ON Azerbaijan, but considering the precedent set last year in Nairobi would it be possible to choose someone FROM Azerbaijan, or at least from that part of the world? Deirdre On 2 October 2012 17:14, Robert Guerra wrote: Colleagues, > > >I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. > >Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > >I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: > >http://www.katypearce.net/ > > >regards > >Robert >-- >R. Guerra >Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > > > >On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> Dear list, >> >> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >> >> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >> >> izumi >> > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Tue Oct 2 19:06:48 2012 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 18:06:48 -0500 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: +1 Carlos from Brazil Enviado desde mi iPhone El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: > Colleagues, > > > I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. > > Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > > I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: > > http://www.katypearce.net/ > > > regards > > Robert > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > > > On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> Dear list, >> >> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >> >> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >> >> izumi >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From apisan at unam.mx Tue Oct 2 19:22:16 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 23:22:16 +0000 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br>,<0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D4841D1DF@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Robert, I would like to second your proposal of including Katy Pearce in the roster. I have interacted with her academically and observed her good work, good planning, careful observation, rational analysis, sensitive treatment of subjects which may endanger others, clear explanations and heartfelt advocacy. She brings a fresh voice from a generation on whose seats we insist to stay. Her care about the potential speakers very rightfully suggested by Deirdre add weight to the appreciation of her merits. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Robert Guerra [rguerra at privaterra.org] Enviado el: martes, 02 de octubre de 2012 16:14 Hasta: Internet Governance Caucus Asunto: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku Colleagues, I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: http://www.katypearce.net/ regards Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Oct 3 01:19:45 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:49:45 +0530 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> + 1 The best choice! On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: > +1 Carlos from Brazil > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: > >> Colleagues, >> >> >> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. >> >> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. >> >> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: >> >> http://www.katypearce.net/ >> >> >> regards >> >> Robert >> -- >> R. Guerra >> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >> >> >> >> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> Dear list, >>> >>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>> >>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>> >>> izumi >>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Oct 3 01:25:14 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 03 Oct 2012 10:55:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: > > + 1 > > The best choice! Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for Carlos Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy either way) . parminder > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: >> +1 Carlos from Brazil >> >> Enviado desde mi iPhone >> >> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: >> >>> Colleagues, >>> >>> >>> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. >>> >>> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. >>> >>> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: >>> >>> http://www.katypearce.net/ >>> >>> >>> regards >>> >>> Robert >>> -- >>> R. Guerra >>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >>> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >>> Email:rguerra at privaterra.org >>> >>> >>> >>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>> >>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Wed Oct 3 01:27:34 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 10:57:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce -C On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: > > > + 1 > > The best choice! > > > Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for Carlos > Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy either way) . > parminder > > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: > > +1 Carlos from Brazil > > Enviado desde mi iPhone > > El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: > > > Colleagues, > > > I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. > > Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > > I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: > http://www.katypearce.net/ > > > regards > > Robert > -- > R. Guerra > Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom > Email: rguerra at privaterra.org > > > > On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 3 03:32:35 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 00:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Live broadcast of the Africa Internet Governance Forum - Cairo happening now Message-ID: <1349249555.54528.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear all Finally, you can participate remotely on http://bambuser.com/v/3031041 Best N   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From judyokite at gmail.com Wed Oct 3 04:48:55 2012 From: judyokite at gmail.com (Judy Okite) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 11:48:55 +0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: +1 on Nnenna Nwakanma, Cote d'Ivoire, Africa. She can speak, she understands the issues and has the passion. Kind Regards, *“Don't undertake a project unless it is manifestly important and nearly impossible” Edwin Land* On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce > > -C > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder wrote: > >> >> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: >> >> >> + 1 >> >> The best choice! >> >> >> Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for Carlos >> Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy either way) . >> parminder >> >> >> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: >> >> +1 Carlos from Brazil >> >> Enviado desde mi iPhone >> >> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: >> >> >> Colleagues, >> >> >> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. >> >> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. >> >> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: >> http://www.katypearce.net/ >> >> >> regards >> >> Robert >> -- >> R. Guerra >> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >> >> >> >> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> Dear list, >> >> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >> >> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >> >> izumi >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Wed Oct 3 09:17:39 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 13:17:39 +0000 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> , Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D4841D59B@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Hi, also glad to support Nnenna for the roster. Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Judy Okite [judyokite at gmail.com] Enviado el: miércoles, 03 de octubre de 2012 03:48 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Chaitanya Dhareshwar CC: parminder Asunto: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku +1 on Nnenna Nwakanma, Cote d'Ivoire, Africa. She can speak, she understands the issues and has the passion. Kind Regards, “Don't undertake a project unless it is manifestly important and nearly impossible” Edwin Land On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar > wrote: This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce -C On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder > wrote: On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: + 1 The best choice! Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for Carlos Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy either way) . parminder On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: +1 Carlos from Brazil Enviado desde mi iPhone El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: Colleagues, I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: http://www.katypearce.net/ regards Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: Dear list, We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. izumi ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Oct 3 09:19:45 2012 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 22:19:45 +0900 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Judy Okite wrote: > +1 on Nnenna Nwakanma, Cote d'Ivoire, Africa. > has my support. > She can speak, she understands the issues and has the passion. > and right now helping organize the africa IGF Adam > > Kind Regards, > > “Don't undertake a project unless it is manifestly important and nearly > impossible” Edwin Land > > > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar > wrote: >> >> This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce >> >> -C >> >> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: >>> >>> >>> + 1 >>> >>> The best choice! >>> >>> >>> Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for Carlos >>> Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy either way) . >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: >>> >>> +1 Carlos from Brazil >>> >>> Enviado desde mi iPhone >>> >>> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra >>> escribió: >>> >>> Colleagues, >>> >>> >>> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts >>> for the Baku main session. >>> >>> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very >>> well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent >>> resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand >>> Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. >>> >>> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is >>> available at her website: >>> >>> http://www.katypearce.net/ >>> >>> >>> regards >>> >>> Robert >>> -- >>> R. Guerra >>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >>> Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom >>> Email: rguerra at privaterra.org >>> >>> >>> >>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>> Dear list, >>> >>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>> >>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From iza at anr.org Wed Oct 3 10:01:26 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 23:01:26 +0900 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Dear list, Thank you for the many great nominations. We need to select two speakers. I think it is important that we select according to the mutually agreed principles. As usual, we need to consider gender and regional balance. So, at least one each, unless we have two female speakers, which is just fine in my view. I think she or he should be relevant to the Civil society activities, not confined by IGC itself, but broader interests of the CS in terms of Internet governance. As was pointed out, the relevance with the host might be another factor. Relevance with development agenda should be also considered. For those who have nominated someone, could you please confirm if he or she is willing to accept? Unfortunately, we have no travel support for the speakers, per se. So, please also confirm that she or he will be able to travel to Baku. So far, most, if not all, of the nominees seem to be filling these criteria. I like to see more discussions, support, new names, seconds etc for a couple of days, and then we need to close. I propose to setup a poll, run for 48 hours and then select the winner. Is this OK with you? Or, please suggest any alternative or additional thouhts. best, izumi -------------- 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 From glaser at cgi.br Wed Oct 3 11:59:25 2012 From: glaser at cgi.br (Hartmut Glaser) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 12:59:25 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <93B03C18-080D-4853-86EC-C09570AF1BF8@cgi.br> Carlos Afonso's expenses will be covered by the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee/CGI.br. via iPhone Prof. Hartmut Glaser On 03/10/2012, at 11:01, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > Thank you for the many great nominations. > We need to select two speakers. > > I think it is important that we select according to the > mutually agreed principles. > > As usual, we need to consider gender and regional balance. So, at > least one each, unless we have two female speakers, which is just fine > in my view. > > I think she or he should be relevant to the Civil society activities, > not confined by IGC itself, but broader interests of the CS in terms > of Internet governance. > > As was pointed out, the relevance with the host might be another > factor. Relevance with development agenda should be also considered. > > For those who have nominated someone, could you please confirm if he > or she is willing to accept? > Unfortunately, we have no travel support for the speakers, per se. So, > please also confirm that she or he will be able to travel to Baku. > > So far, most, if not all, of the nominees seem to be filling these criteria. > > I like to see more discussions, support, new names, seconds etc for a > couple of days, and then we need to close. > > I propose to setup a poll, run for 48 hours and then select the winner. > > Is this OK with you? Or, please suggest any alternative or additional thouhts. > > best, > > izumi > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mail at christopherwilkinson.eu Wed Oct 3 13:00:47 2012 From: mail at christopherwilkinson.eu (CW Mail) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 19:00:47 +0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Good evening: May I say that I do not care who shall speak for IGC in Baku. The important thing is what she and/or he shall say. Rather than worrying about 'nominations', since that is already pre- selected by those who can afford time and money to travel (and get their visas etc.), I would rather see this list discussing a concrete speaking brief for the IGC statements at the IGF. Just a thought, CW On 03 Oct 2012, at 16:01, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > Thank you for the many great nominations. > We need to select two speakers. > > I think it is important that we select according to the > mutually agreed principles. > > As usual, we need to consider gender and regional balance. So, at > least one each, unless we have two female speakers, which is just fine > in my view. > > I think she or he should be relevant to the Civil society activities, > not confined by IGC itself, but broader interests of the CS in terms > of Internet governance. > > As was pointed out, the relevance with the host might be another > factor. Relevance with development agenda should be also considered. > > For those who have nominated someone, could you please confirm if he > or she is willing to accept? > Unfortunately, we have no travel support for the speakers, per se. So, > please also confirm that she or he will be able to travel to Baku. > > So far, most, if not all, of the nominees seem to be filling these > criteria. > > I like to see more discussions, support, new names, seconds etc for a > couple of days, and then we need to close. > > I propose to setup a poll, run for 48 hours and then select the > winner. > > Is this OK with you? Or, please suggest any alternative or > additional thouhts. > > best, > > izumi > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Wed Oct 3 13:39:01 2012 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 12:39:01 -0500 Subject: [governance] Philippine Controversy Over the CyberCrime Law Message-ID: Hi all, I am just sharing about what's going on my turf. Apparently the Philippine Government passed a CyberCRime Prevention Act - well, I suppose that's good against hacking, identity theft and spamming. But there's a provision on online libel that's pretty getting on every Filipino's nerves.Anything that you would post, for instance, in Facebook criticizing anybody is considered libel. This also includes sharing or liking a post or picture. Just to show that sometimes politicians have no business making laws they know nothing much. Here's a news story from Forbes below: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/10/02/the-philippines-passes-the-cybercrime-prevention-act-that-makes-sopa-look-reasonable/ Regards, Charity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Wed Oct 3 14:33:24 2012 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 18:33:24 +0000 Subject: [governance] Philippine Controversy Over the CyberCrime Law In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B1499B4@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Thanks Charity for sharing. You know it's bad when Forbes 'The Capitalist Tool' thinks a cybercrime law has gone too far... Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Charity Gamboa [charityg at diplomacy.edu] Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 1:39 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Philippine Controversy Over the CyberCrime Law Hi all, I am just sharing about what's going on my turf. Apparently the Philippine Government passed a CyberCRime Prevention Act - well, I suppose that's good against hacking, identity theft and spamming. But there's a provision on online libel that's pretty getting on every Filipino's nerves.Anything that you would post, for instance, in Facebook criticizing anybody is considered libel. This also includes sharing or liking a post or picture. Just to show that sometimes politicians have no business making laws they know nothing much. Here's a news story from Forbes below: http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2012/10/02/the-philippines-passes-the-cybercrime-prevention-act-that-makes-sopa-look-reasonable/ Regards, Charity -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Wed Oct 3 14:33:20 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 18:33:20 +0000 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> I agree with these comments. --MM From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of CW Mail Rather than worrying about 'nominations', since that is already pre- selected by those who can afford time and money to travel (and get their visas etc.), I would rather see this list discussing a concrete speaking brief for the IGC statements at the IGF. Just a thought, CW -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dsullivan at globalnetworkinitiative.org Wed Oct 3 15:15:04 2012 From: dsullivan at globalnetworkinitiative.org (David Sullivan) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:15:04 -0400 Subject: [governance] GNI Policy Brief: Corporate Responsibility and Global Internet Governance In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I though this list may be interested in a new publication by the Global Network Initiative (apologies for cross-posting)... *Corporate Responsibility and Global Internet Governance * *A Global Network Initiative Policy Brief* This December in Dubai, world governments will gather to renegotiate a key treaty under the auspices of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a UN agency that specializes in global telecommunications. The meeting, known as the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT), has been billed as a mortal threat to Internet freedom, a rare opportunity to fix inequitable flaws in the existing global economic framework for communications infrastructure, and all or none of the above. Although there is a real risk that authoritarian states will use this process to seek greater government control over the Internet, it would be a mistake to turn the WCIT into a referendum on UN involvement in Internet governance. The UN already plays a key role through the international human rights system, and by supporting discussion venues like the Internet Governance Forum. The problem is that the opaque ITU process, which is largely closed to civil society participation, presents opportunities for governments to pursue politically motivated policies at the expense of users and innovators alike. Although companies and governments have legitimate reasons to cooperate on Internet policy, when this happens behind closed doors without adequate safeguards the human rights of users can be put at risk. The Global Network Initiative (GNI) was formed to develop standards and an accountability framework for information and communications technology (ICT) companies faced with government requests impacting free expression and privacy rights, and to strengthen efforts to work with governments to advance these rights globally. Based on this experience, we offer the following recommendations for governments and other stakeholders to consider: 1. Embrace international human rights standards. They provide an objective baseline that is universally acknowledged, even if governments do not always live up to them. 2. Ensure multi-stakeholder collaboration. Pool the collective expertise of informed stakeholders and allow civil society to check company and government action that may infringe on rights. 3. Enhance transparency. Committing to a system of transparency with the public provides credibility and accountability. Internet governance and policy is a complex subject that is unsuited to top-down, government-dominated structures. Taken together, human rights standards, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and transparency are necessary safeguards against increased government control of the Internet, and also offer practical opportunities to improve the existing system. Download the full policy brief (PDF). * * *GNI is a multi-stakeholder group of companies, civil society organizations (including human rights and press freedom groups), investors and academics, who have created a collaborative approach to protect and advance freedom of expression and privacy in the ICT sector. GNI provides resources for ICT companies to help them address difficult issues related to freedom of expression and privacy that they may face anywhere in the world. GNI has created a framework of principles and a confidential, collaborative approach to working through challenges of corporate responsibility in the ICT sector.* -- David Sullivan Policy and Communications Director Global Network Initiative Office: +1 202 407 8831 Cell: +1 646 595 5373 www.globalnetworkinitiative.org @theGNI -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ginger at paque.net Wed Oct 3 16:34:25 2012 From: ginger at paque.net (Ginger Paque) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 15:34:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. Since the nominees are speaking on our behalf, perhaps we should ask them for and offer some speaking points for discussion 'as well'--as we have done before in helping speakers outline their interventions. Cheers, Ginger On 3 October 2012 13:33, Milton L Mueller wrote: > I agree with these comments.**** > > --MM**** > > ** ** > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *CW Mail > > **** > > > Rather than worrying about 'nominations', since that is already pre- > selected by those who can afford time and money to travel (and get > their visas etc.), > I would rather see this list discussing a concrete speaking brief for > the IGC statements at the IGF. > > Just a thought, > > CW > > > **** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Wed Oct 3 16:45:07 2012 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 13:45:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <1349297107.5633.YahooMailNeo@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Well said Ginger !!   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Ginger Paque To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller Cc: CW Mail ; Izumi AIZU Sent: Wednesday, October 3, 2012 1:34 PM Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. Since the nominees are speaking on our behalf, perhaps we should ask them for and offer some speaking points for discussion 'as well'--as we have done before in helping speakers outline their interventions. Cheers, Ginger On 3 October 2012 13:33, Milton L Mueller wrote: I agree with these comments. >--MM >  >From:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of CW Mail > > > >Rather than worrying about 'nominations', since that is already pre- >selected by those who can afford time and money to travel (and get  >their visas etc.), >I would rather see this list discussing a concrete speaking brief for  >the IGC statements at the IGF. > >Just a thought, > >CW > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From femlists at gmail.com Wed Oct 3 17:17:58 2012 From: femlists at gmail.com (Magaly Pazello) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 18:17:58 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: I agree with Ginger comments. Magaly 2012/10/3 Ginger Paque > I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not > 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as > their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as > speaking abilities when we nominate them. > > Since the nominees are speaking on our behalf, perhaps we should ask them > for and offer some speaking points for discussion 'as well'--as we have > done before in helping speakers outline their interventions. > > Cheers, Ginger > > On 3 October 2012 13:33, Milton L Mueller wrote: > >> I agree with these comments. >> >> --MM >> >> >> >> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: >> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *CW Mail >> >> >> Rather than worrying about 'nominations', since that is already pre- >> selected by those who can afford time and money to travel (and get >> their visas etc.), >> I would rather see this list discussing a concrete speaking brief for >> the IGC statements at the IGF. >> >> Just a thought, >> >> CW >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Wed Oct 3 17:39:57 2012 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 18:39:57 -0300 Subject: RES: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> Message-ID: <04c201cda1af$a474d000$ed5e7000$@uol.com.br> Good suggestion!! -----Mensagem original----- De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Robert Guerra Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:15 Para: Internet Governance Caucus Assunto: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku Colleagues, I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: http://www.katypearce.net/ regards Robert -- R. Guerra Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 Twitter: twitter.com/netfreedom Email: rguerra at privaterra.org On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > -------------- 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 From natalia.enciso at gmail.com Wed Oct 3 20:38:51 2012 From: natalia.enciso at gmail.com (Natalia Enciso) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 20:38:51 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <15177927-D3AA-48A1-9869-D3A9F9BE7E31@safernet.org.br> Message-ID: +1 for Carlos Affonso. 2012/10/2 Louis Pouzin (well) > +1 for Carlos Afonso (CA) > Louis > - - - > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Thiago Tavares Nunes de Oliveira < > thiagotavares at safernet.org.br> wrote: > >> +1 Carlos Afonso (CA) >> >> all the best, >> Thiago Tavares >> SaferNet Brasil >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- natalia.enciso at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 3 22:12:25 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2012 19:12:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <15177927-D3AA-48A1-9869-D3A9F9BE7E31@safernet.org.br> Message-ID: <1349316745.29588.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Hi people I do not mind "reading a statement" that has been consensually drafted, on behalf of the CS. Please note that my badge will bear "Private Sector" as I registered as the CEO of my Consultancy. [ Shift      ] Back to watching Obama-Romney debate Nnenna   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Natalia Enciso To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Louis Pouzin (well) Sent: Thursday, October 4, 2012 12:38 AM Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku +1 for Carlos Affonso. 2012/10/2 Louis Pouzin (well) +1 for Carlos Afonso (CA) >Louis >- - - > > > >On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:02 PM, Thiago Tavares Nunes de Oliveira wrote: > >+1 Carlos Afonso (CA) >> >>all the best, >>Thiago Tavares >>SaferNet Brasil >> >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > -- natalia.enciso at gmail.com ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Oct 4 02:13:48 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:13:48 +0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <8468E09B-B3E2-457A-B852-C15BF532E1AC@uzh.ch> Hi I just looked at the list of speakers who will be available in Baku http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/2012/Panellists/Panellists%202012%20v2.pdf, which seems like a reasonable starting point. Would like to throw another idea in the pot: Rebecca McKinnon. After all, she's involved in a MS enterprise, Global Voices Online, recently published a sort bestseller on human rights and the Internet, and is a very good speaker. I've not asked her yet if she's interested, just floating it here for now. Bill -------------- McKinnon Rebecca (Ms) Primary Professional affiliation: New America Foundation Stakeholder Group: Civil Society Region: Western European and Others Group - WEOG Biography: Rebecca MacKinnon is a Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow at the New America Foundation, where she conducts research, writing and advocacy on global Internet policy, free expression, and the impact of digital technologies on human rights. Her first book, Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom, will be published in January 2012 by Basic Books. MacKinnon is cofounder of Global Voices Online (globalvoicesonline.org), a global citizen media network. She also serves on the Boards of Directors of the Committee to Protect Journalists and the Global Network Initiative, a multi-stakeholder initiative to promote the upholding of basic principles on free expression and privacy in the ICT sector. (globalnetworkinitiative.org) Fluent in Mandarin Chinese, MacKinnon worked as a journalist for CNN in Beijing for nine years including as Beijing Bureau Chief and Correspondent from 1998-2001; then as CNN’s Tokyo Bureau Chief and Correspondent from 2001-03. >From 2004-06 she was a Research Fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, where she began her 196 ongoing research and writing about Chinese Internet censorship in addition to launching Global Voices Online. In 2007-08 she taught online journalism at the University of Hong Kong's Journalism and Media Studies Centre. In 2009 she conducted research and writing as an Open Society Institute Fellow, and in the Spring of 2010 she was a Visiting Fellow at Princeton’s Center or Information Technology Policy. MacKinnon received her AB magna cum laude from Harvard College and was a Fullbright scholar in Taiwan in 1991-92. On Oct 3, 2012, at 4:01 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > Thank you for the many great nominations. > We need to select two speakers. > > I think it is important that we select according to the > mutually agreed principles. > > As usual, we need to consider gender and regional balance. So, at > least one each, unless we have two female speakers, which is just fine > in my view. > > I think she or he should be relevant to the Civil society activities, > not confined by IGC itself, but broader interests of the CS in terms > of Internet governance. > > As was pointed out, the relevance with the host might be another > factor. Relevance with development agenda should be also considered. > > For those who have nominated someone, could you please confirm if he > or she is willing to accept? > Unfortunately, we have no travel support for the speakers, per se. So, > please also confirm that she or he will be able to travel to Baku. > > So far, most, if not all, of the nominees seem to be filling these criteria. > > I like to see more discussions, support, new names, seconds etc for a > couple of days, and then we need to close. > > I propose to setup a poll, run for 48 hours and then select the winner. > > Is this OK with you? Or, please suggest any alternative or additional thouhts. > > best, > > izumi > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Oct 4 02:34:26 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:34:26 +0200 Subject: [governance] NCUC Policy Conference 12 Oct in Toronto Message-ID: <05793ECD-A746-4A54-B817-6740BF1F4114@uzh.ch> Hi Everyone coming to ICANN and in Toronto on Friday 12th is most welcome to attend, so feel free to share. Registration and program at http://www.amiando.com/NCUC-ICANN45 Best, Bill ----------- NCUC Press Release - 3 October 2012 Civil Society Leaders Converge in Toronto for "ICANN & Internet Governance: Security and Freedom in a Connected World" Cyber-Security Expert Ron Deibert and new ICANN CEO Fadi Chehade Address Non-Commercial Users Policy Conference on Eve of ICANN #45 Public interest groups involved in ICANN will gather for the event, "ICANN & Internet Governance: Security & Freedom in a Connected World" on Friday 12 October at the Fairmont Royal York Hotel in Toronto, Canada. Sponsored by the Noncommercial Users Constituency (NCUC), the voice of civil society in ICANN, the policy conference will focus on key ICANN policy issues like the need to promote both cyber-security and human rights in the development of global Internet policies. The event kicks-off with a morning address from cyber-security expert Ron Deibert, Director of the Canada Centre for Global Security Studies and The Citizen Lab, an inter-disciplinary research and development hothouse at the University of Toronto. Deibert will address the need to establish a cyber-security strategy for global civil society. "Cyberspace is at a watershed moment. Global civil society, now increasingly recognised as an important stakeholder in cyberspace governance, needs to step up to the challenge," said Deibert. "What is required is nothing less than a serious and comprehensive security strategy for cyberspace that addresses the very real threats that plague governments and corporations, addresses national and other security concerns in a forthright manner, while protecting and preserving open networks of information and communication." The afternoon sessions begin with welcoming remarks from Fadi Chehade, ICANN's new Chief Executive Officer, a Lebanese-Egyptian IT entrepreneur, who took the helm of ICANN last month and pronounced he was committed to strengthening the multi-stakeholder process of Internet governance. Additional speakers at NCUC's policy conference include Fionna Alexander from the U.S. Commerce Department and other governmental representatives. The all-day event's four panel sessions include participation from ICANN board members and senior staff, civil society and Internet business leaders. The conference will explore a broad range of ICANN policy issues including privacy concerns related to the whois policy that requires the publication of registrants' personal data and discussion of ongoing negotiations with law enforcement agencies regarding a related policy that privacy authorities have called "unlawful". The geopolitical landscape of Internet governance models and the shifting role of stakeholders will be addressed by experts from around the world. NCUC's conference will also explore policy issues related to controversial new domain names such as protection for freedom of expression in the face of cultural differences and sensitivities. Concerns about intellectual property rights and new top-level domain names remains an area under rapid development and will be ripe for discussion as well as activities related to extra-territorial domain name seizures. Including human rights principles in ICANN policy development will be considered, in addition to ways civil society can become involved in the development of ICANN policies, which impact Internet users worldwide. NCUC represents more than 250 noncommercial organizations and individuals from around the world on ICANN policy matters and was formed in 1999 in Berlin at one of ICANN's earliest meetings. Currently NCUC represents a wide range of non-commercial interests in ICANN policy development including universities and educational institutions, human rights organizations, development, promotion of the arts, children's welfare, scientific research, community networking, and many other non-commercial interests. NCUC participates at ICANN as a constituency within the Non-Commercial Stakeholder Group (NCSG) and the Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO), which makes ICANN policy recommendations and selects board members. "The conference subtitle recognizes our shared twin goals of security and freedom, and questions to what extent must we sacrifice one for the other," said meeting organizer Robin Gross of NCUC and IP Justice, a civil liberties organization based in San Francisco. The constituency's 2012 Toronto conference builds on the policy conference NCUC held in 2011 in which craigslist.org founder Craig Newmark addressed the ICANN community in San Francisco. The 2012 conference concludes with an evening reception at the historic Fairmont Royal York overlooking the beautiful Canadian waterfront. The event is free to attend and open the public, but advance registration is required because space is limited. NCUC's conference is held with support from the Brazilian Internet Steering Registry CGI.br, the Public Interest Registry (PIR), and ICANN. Civil Society event partners include The Citizen Lab, the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) and the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) based at the University of Ottawa. Conference sessions will be audiocast live and archived for later downloading, and remote participation will be available from the event's website via Adobe Connect for those not able to travel to Toronto on 12 October. For event details including conference schedule, speaker list, remote participation details, and to register to the event: http://www.amiando.com/NCUC-ICANN45 Contact for more information: Robin Gross, IP Justice Email: Robin at ipjustice.org Brenden Keurbis, Internet Governance Project & University of Syracuse Email: bnkuerbi at syr.edu *************************************************** William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland william.drake at uzh.ch www.williamdrake.org **************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Oct 4 02:36:21 2012 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:36:21 +0800 Subject: [governance] IGF Community Site updated for Baku Message-ID: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> Some of you may remember the IGF Community Site at http://igf-online.net, which since 2007 has been the only volunteer-run community portal for IGF participants. It continues to offer facilities that don't exist on the official website, and which are freely available for anyone to use. Its most useful facility is a page for each and every IGF event, which contains a link to a dedicated chatroom and wiki page for the event, lists the hashtags to be used on other social media sites (with a one-click Twitter search), and provides the ability for participants to leave links and comments. In addition there is a subscribable calendar, a community wiki, community blog, feed aggregation, chat server, and a multilingual, embeddable menu bar that links all the official and community IGF resources together. All the software used to provide this is 100% free and open source. Here is a quick walkthrough which highlights the features of the site: 1. Begin at http://igf-online.net/. The menu bar that runs across the top links you to all the official and community resources you need for IGF 2012. If it's not in your preferred language, try switching to French, Spanish or Russian from the Language menu. 2. Click "Calendar", which will take you to the IGF week by default. If you like, switch from "Week" to "Day" view using the controls on the right hand side. You can subscribe to the calendar in software such as iCal, Google Calendar or Sunbird using the "Subscribe" link. 3. Click on any event displayed in the calendar, then click again on the link in the small window that opens up, to load up a blog page for that event. As you'll see, listed here are the official workshop description, links to the wiki and chat pages for the event, and its hashtags. 4. You can contribute information about the event (such as a report, feedback, or questions) by simply replying to the event blog post, or by editing the linked wiki page. (If you want to be sure the event organisers see what you write, drop them an email pointing them to it too.) 5. In either case, you'll need to log in to the blog or wiki before posting to it. The easiest way to do that is with an OpenID. If you have a Google or Yahoo account, you already have an OpenID! If not, there are many places to sign up for one - see http://openid.net/get-an-openid. 6. If you have a blog of your own, drop me a link to it - I'll add it to the aggregated RSS feed which is available under the "Feeds" link from the "Info/Wiki" menu bar. If you don't have one, blog on the Community Site itself! Just click "+ New" at the top of the page once logged in. I hope that this has given you a flavour for just how useful this resource can be - and it will only become more useful as more people begin to use it. So please also blog, tweet, link to and tell as many people as you can about the IGF Community Site. Hope to see your contributions there soon! -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* 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 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 02:41:48 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 18:41:48 +1200 Subject: [governance] IGF Community Site updated for Baku In-Reply-To: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> References: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> Message-ID: Thanks Jeremy. :) On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Some of you may remember the IGF Community Site at http://igf-online.net, > which since 2007 has been the only volunteer-run community portal for IGF > participants. It continues to offer facilities that don't exist on the > official website, and which are freely available for anyone to use. > > Its most useful facility is a page for each and every IGF event, which > contains a link to a dedicated chatroom and wiki page for the event, lists > the hashtags to be used on other social media sites (with a one-click > Twitter search), and provides the ability for participants to leave links > and comments. > > In addition there is a subscribable calendar, a community wiki, community > blog, feed aggregation, chat server, and a multilingual, embeddable menu > bar that links all the official and community IGF resources together. All > the software used to provide this is 100% free and open source. > > Here is a quick walkthrough which highlights the features of the site: > > 1. Begin at http://igf-online.net/. The menu bar that runs across the > top links you to all the official and community resources you need for IGF > 2012. If it's not in your preferred language, try switching to French, > Spanish or Russian from the Language menu. > 2. Click "Calendar", which will take you to the IGF week by default. > If you like, switch from "Week" to "Day" view using the controls on the > right hand side. You can subscribe to the calendar in software such as > iCal, Google Calendar or Sunbird using the "Subscribe" link. > 3. Click on any event displayed in the calendar, then click again on > the link in the small window that opens up, to load up a blog page for that > event. As you'll see, listed here are the official workshop description, > links to the wiki and chat pages for the event, and its hashtags. > 4. You can contribute information about the event (such as a report, > feedback, or questions) by simply replying to the event blog post, or by > editing the linked wiki page. (If you want to be sure the event organisers > see what you write, drop them an email pointing them to it too.) > 5. In either case, you'll need to log in to the blog or wiki before > posting to it. The easiest way to do that is with an OpenID. If you have > a Google or Yahoo account, you already have an OpenID! If not, there are > many places to sign up for one - see http://openid.net/get-an-openid. > 6. If you have a blog of your own, drop me a link to it - I'll add it > to the aggregated RSS feed which is available under the "Feeds" link from > the "Info/Wiki" menu bar. If you don't have one, blog on the Community > Site itself! Just click "+ New" at the top of the page once logged in. > > I hope that this has given you a flavour for just how useful this resource > can be - and it will only become more useful as more people begin to use > it. So please also blog, tweet, link to and tell as many people as you can > about the IGF Community Site. Hope to see your contributions there soon! > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > 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.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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 4 04:02:15 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 01:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Africa Interne Governance Forum: Live broadcasts and remote participation Message-ID: <1349337735.22538.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> On Twitter: #afigf Video and audio:  bambuser.com/v/3033642 Best Nnenna   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From b.schombe at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 06:36:33 2012 From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 12:36:33 +0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN Téléphone mobile:+243998983491 email : b.schombe at gmail.com skype : b.schombe blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr Site Web : www.ticafrica.net 2012/10/2 Izumi AIZU > Dear list, > > We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > > Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > izumi > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From divina.meigs at orange.fr Thu Oct 4 06:38:14 2012 From: divina.meigs at orange.fr (Divina MEIGS) Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 12:38:14 +0200 Subject: [governance] From NWICO to WSIS: 30 years of communication geopolitics Message-ID: Dear colleagues Thank you for expressing interest in our publication: ³From NWICO to WSIS: 30 years of communication geopolitics². As requested, please find attached the table of contents. Divina Frau-Meigs -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 06:41:11 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 06:41:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] From NWICO to WSIS: 30 years of communication geopolitics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Divina, Think you forgot the attachment? Deirdre On 4 October 2012 06:38, Divina MEIGS wrote: > Dear colleagues > Thank you for expressing interest in our publication: “From NWICO to > WSIS: 30 years of communication geopolitics”. As requested, please find > attached the table of contents. > Divina Frau-Meigs > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 08:11:43 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:11:43 -0400 Subject: [governance] FW: [OIA] INTERNET 2012 BUS TOUR KICKS OFF - In-Reply-To: <506D157D.6020708@newnetworks.com> References: <506D157D.6020708@newnetworks.com> Message-ID: <087001cda229$85fc3670$91f4a350$@gmail.com> From: oia-bounces at lists.bway.net [mailto:oia-bounces at lists.bway.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Kushnick Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 12:50 AM To: oia at lists.bway.net Subject: [OIA] INTERNET 2012 BUS TOUR KICKS OFF - INTERNET 2012 BUS TOUR KICKS OFF -- The Internet Association - the new group focused on protecting Internet freedom, whose members include Amazon, AOL, eBay, Expedia, Facebook and Google, among others, has joined up with Reddit on "Internet 2012," a 10-city bus tour highlighting the impacts of the Internet on jobs, economic growth, freedom, creativity and prosperity. The bus tour kicks off today in Denver in conjunction with the presidential debate, and will make stops in 10 cities on its way to the vice presidential debate in Danville, Ky. More info: http://bit.ly/T00cbw -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Thu Oct 4 09:07:39 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 13:07:39 +0000 Subject: [governance] Watching Parminder on TV Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D4841EE1D@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Hi all, watching Parminder on http://blog.ficci.com/iigc-webcast/1410/ Indian Internet Governance Forum, link thanks to Joly McFie. Alejandro PIsanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu Thu Oct 4 09:38:11 2012 From: David_Allen_AB63 at post.harvard.edu (David Allen) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 09:38:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] IGF Community Site updated for Baku In-Reply-To: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> References: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> Message-ID: <5BBAA671-5BC0-4C33-AA73-7A39F7CF06AF@post.harvard.edu> Again, the greatest congratulations - and thanks - to Jeremy. The IGF Community Site represents, in simple words, an extraordinary amount of work. And, especially, it took really serious talent, to create. Thanks, Jeremy. A major contribution to the community. David On Oct 4, 2012, at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Some of you may remember the IGF Community Site at http://igf-online.net > , which since 2007 has been the only volunteer-run community portal > for IGF participants. It continues to offer facilities that don't > exist on the official website, and which are freely available for > anyone to use. > > Its most useful facility is a page for each and every IGF event, > which contains a link to a dedicated chatroom and wiki page for the > event, lists the hashtags to be used on other social media sites > (with a one-click Twitter search), and provides the ability for > participants to leave links and comments. > > In addition there is a subscribable calendar, a community wiki, > community blog, feed aggregation, chat server, and a multilingual, > embeddable menu bar that links all the official and community IGF > resources together. All the software used to provide this is 100% > free and open source. > > Here is a quick walkthrough which highlights the features of the site: > Begin at http://igf-online.net/. The menu bar that runs across the > top links you to all the official and community resources you need > for IGF 2012. If it's not in your preferred language, try switching > to French, Spanish or Russian from the Language menu. > Click "Calendar", which will take you to the IGF week by default. > If you like, switch from "Week" to "Day" view using the controls on > the right hand side. You can subscribe to the calendar in software > such as iCal, Google Calendar or Sunbird using the "Subscribe" link. > Click on any event displayed in the calendar, then click again on > the link in the small window that opens up, to load up a blog page > for that event. As you'll see, listed here are the official > workshop description, links to the wiki and chat pages for the > event, and its hashtags. > You can contribute information about the event (such as a report, > feedback, or questions) by simply replying to the event blog post, > or by editing the linked wiki page. (If you want to be sure the > event organisers see what you write, drop them an email pointing > them to it too.) > In either case, you'll need to log in to the blog or wiki before > posting to it. The easiest way to do that is with an OpenID. If > you have a Google or Yahoo account, you already have an OpenID! If > not, there are many places to sign up for one - see http://openid.net/get-an-openid > . > If you have a blog of your own, drop me a link to it - I'll add it > to the aggregated RSS feed which is available under the "Feeds" link > from the "Info/Wiki" menu bar. If you don't have one, blog on the > Community Site itself! Just click "+ New" at the top of the page > once logged in. > I hope that this has given you a flavour for just how useful this > resource can be - and it will only become more useful as more people > begin to use it. So please also blog, tweet, link to and tell as > many people as you can about the IGF Community Site. Hope to see > your contributions there soon! > > -- > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > 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 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless > necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 09:58:33 2012 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 09:58:33 -0400 Subject: [governance] IGF Community Site updated for Baku In-Reply-To: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> References: <506D2E65.5090104@ciroap.org> Message-ID: This is excellent! Keep up the great work Jeremy! Rgds, Tracy On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Some of you may remember the IGF Community Site at http://igf-online.net, > which since 2007 has been the only volunteer-run community portal for IGF > participants. It continues to offer facilities that don't exist on the > official website, and which are freely available for anyone to use. > > Its most useful facility is a page for each and every IGF event, which > contains a link to a dedicated chatroom and wiki page for the event, lists > the hashtags to be used on other social media sites (with a one-click > Twitter search), and provides the ability for participants to leave links > and comments. > > In addition there is a subscribable calendar, a community wiki, community > blog, feed aggregation, chat server, and a multilingual, embeddable menu > bar that links all the official and community IGF resources together. All > the software used to provide this is 100% free and open source. > > Here is a quick walkthrough which highlights the features of the site: > > 1. Begin at http://igf-online.net/. The menu bar that runs across the > top links you to all the official and community resources you need for IGF > 2012. If it's not in your preferred language, try switching to French, > Spanish or Russian from the Language menu. > 2. Click "Calendar", which will take you to the IGF week by default. > If you like, switch from "Week" to "Day" view using the controls on the > right hand side. You can subscribe to the calendar in software such as > iCal, Google Calendar or Sunbird using the "Subscribe" link. > 3. Click on any event displayed in the calendar, then click again on > the link in the small window that opens up, to load up a blog page for that > event. As you'll see, listed here are the official workshop description, > links to the wiki and chat pages for the event, and its hashtags. > 4. You can contribute information about the event (such as a report, > feedback, or questions) by simply replying to the event blog post, or by > editing the linked wiki page. (If you want to be sure the event organisers > see what you write, drop them an email pointing them to it too.) > 5. In either case, you'll need to log in to the blog or wiki before > posting to it. The easiest way to do that is with an OpenID. If you have > a Google or Yahoo account, you already have an OpenID! If not, there are > many places to sign up for one - see http://openid.net/get-an-openid. > 6. If you have a blog of your own, drop me a link to it - I'll add it > to the aggregated RSS feed which is available under the "Feeds" link from > the "Info/Wiki" menu bar. If you don't have one, blog on the Community > Site itself! Just click "+ New" at the top of the page once logged in. > > I hope that this has given you a flavour for just how useful this resource > can be - and it will only become more useful as more people begin to use > it. So please also blog, tweet, link to and tell as many people as you can > about the IGF Community Site. Hope to see your contributions there soon! > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > 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.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: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Thu Oct 4 10:04:50 2012 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 14:04:50 +0000 Subject: [governance] 3322.org seized by Microsoft from Chinese DNS service provider In-Reply-To: References: <20120923110830.0038af8b@quill.bollow.ch> <505FFA29.1040807@digsys.bg> <20120924182922.42d2f72b@quill.bollow.ch> <20120924194358.5600c776@quill.bollow.ch> Message-ID: An interesting development in this case http://www.securityweek.com/microsoft-drops-suit-against-nitol-botnet-operator-exchange-cooperation Microsoft has returned control of authoritative DNS for the domain to the owners and the Chinese CERT is helping to identify and block the domains serving up malware. Kerry Brown -------------- 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 From jpohle at vub.ac.be Thu Oct 4 10:24:30 2012 From: jpohle at vub.ac.be (Julia Pohle) Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 16:24:30 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: From NWICO to WSIS: 30 years of communication geopolitics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <506D9C1E.8020303@vub.ac.be> Dear Deirdre, Divina added the attachment, but it wasn't sent by the list server. Please find below the table of content and the link to the publisher's website. Best regards, Julia http://www.intellectbooks.co.uk/books/view-Book,id=4874/ From NWICO to WSIS: 30 Years of Communication Geopolitics Actors and Flows, Structures and Divides. Edited by Divina Frau-Meigs, Jérémie Nicey, Michael Palmer, Julia Pohle and Patricio Tupper Two major regulatory activities have framed global media policies since World War II: the New World Information and Communication Order (NWICO) and the more recent World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). Through extensive research and testimonies from those involved, this book presents an in-depth account from the 1970s to the present of the major issues concerning information flow in international geopolitics, including a look at the negotiations surrounding the major policy debates. Few studies of NWICO and WSIS have considered the continuity between the two activities – or included in the debate the crucial intermediary period between – and this book provides new insight into an issue of multilingual and multicultural importance. PART I: On the Agenda: NWICO * Corelations between NWICO and Information Society: Reflections of a NWICO actor (Mustapha Masmoudi) * The history of NWICO and its lessons (Kaarle Nordenstreng) * NWICO: Reuters’ Gerald Long versus UNESCO’s Seán MacBride (Michael Palmer) * IPS, an alternative source of news: From NWICO to civil society (Patricio Tupper) * New scenarios for the Right to Communicate in Latin America (Gustavo Gonzalez Rodriguez) * Past witnesses’ present comments (Hıfzı Topuz) PART II: Shifting Sands * The Right to Communicate – A continuing victim of historic links to NWICO and UNESCO? (Alan McKenna) * ‘Going Digital’: A historical perspective on early international coperation in informatics (Julia Pohle) * ICTs, discourse and knowledge societies: Implications for policy and practice (Robin Mansell) * Past witnesses’ present comments (Alain Modoux) PART III: Changing the agenda: WSIS and the future * Towards Knowledge Societies in UNESCO and beyond (J.P. Singh) * The notion of acess to information and knowledge: Challenges and divides, sectors and limits (Jérémie Nicey) * The international news agencies (and their TV/multimedia sites): The defence of their traditional lead in international news production (Camille Laville and Michael Palmer) * The least imperfect form of global governance yet? Civil society and multistakeholder governance of communication (Jeremy Shtern, Normand Landry and Marc Raboy) * Civil society and the amplification of media governance, during WSIS and beyond (Divina Frau-Meigs) * Past witnesses’ present comments (Bertrand de La Chapelle) Postface: From New International Information Order to New Information Market Order (Roberto Savio) Project website with filmed interview excerpts: http://nwico2wsis.wordpress.com _______________________________________________________________ Am 04.10.12 12:41, schrieb Deirdre Williams: > Dear Divina, > Think you forgot the attachment? > Deirdre > > On 4 October 2012 06:38, Divina MEIGS > wrote: > > Dear colleagues > Thank you for expressing interest in our publication: “From NWICO > to WSIS: 30 years of communication geopolitics”. As requested, > please find attached the table of contents. > Divina Frau-Meigs > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > “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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Oct 4 20:02:59 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2012 03:02:59 +0300 Subject: [governance] PUBLISHERS AND GOOGLE REACH SETTLEMENT In-Reply-To: <506E1FD4.6010305@eff.org> References: <506E1FD4.6010305@eff.org> Message-ID: <506E23B3.9090400@gmail.com> http://www.publishers.org/press/85/ -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 05:51:25 2012 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 14:51:25 +0500 Subject: [governance] US Announces $2.4M In Local Grants To Combat IP Theft - ahem, really.... Message-ID: US Announces $2.4M In Local Grants To Combat IP Theft Source: http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/10/04/us-announces-2-4m-in-local-grants-to-combat-ip-theft/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alerts -- Regards. -------------------------- FoooOOOOOooooOOOO -------------- 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Fri Oct 5 15:13:36 2012 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 14:13:36 -0500 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi all, I attended a Symantec Security workshop/lecture at Texas Tech University last Thursday. The following report was presented by Nivk L. Kael, Senior Principal Security Strategist. Here are a few things I was able to note down: **Mr. Kael started by saying that there is a large number of hacking in universities globally. The main reason for this is selling everyone's information (Identity Theft). It might be old news but the reason behind it is money. **There were 5.5 billion attacks in 2011 compared to 3 billion attacks in 2010. **Number in spamming dropped to 6.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 4.2 million - but that's just to say that anybody shouldn't be fooled by that number. **There were 403 million malware in 2011 compared to 2010's 28.6 million. **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. **There were 315 million MOBILE vulnerabilities in 2011 versus 163 million in 2010. **It was noted that the US and China topped first and second, respectively, on malicious activity by source overall. **The following sites were cosnidered vulnerable to a lot of malicious attacks: 1. religious/ideologies 2. hosting/personal sites 3. pornography 4. entertainment/music 5. economy 6. technology/computer/Internet 7. travel 8. sports 9. automobile 10. shopping **Malware will continue to rise because cybercriminals are taking advantage of social media. Social media is viral in nature and people are less suspicious of content from friends. **QR codes are being used as an attack tool aka attack tagging - usually deliver trojans and other malware. Read more about the Jester hacker. **Symantec did a study called "Project Honey Stick" where they left iphones intentionally in several cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington D.C. Symantec tracked the phone's activities. They found out that only 50% tried or even attempted to return; and 96% attempted personal and app access. **Be careful of the wifi pineapple. **It took Symantec 18 seconds to hack an Android phone. Have a great weekend! Regards, Charity Gamboa-Embley -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 16:45:45 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 08:45:45 +1200 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report #cyber security Message-ID: Thank you Charity for taking the time to share your notes with us. :) On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Charity Gamboa wrote: > Hi all, > > I attended a Symantec Security workshop/lecture at Texas Tech University > last Thursday. The following report was presented by Nivk L. Kael, Senior > Principal Security Strategist. Here are a few things I was able to note > down: > > **Mr. Kael started by saying that there is a large number of hacking in > universities globally. The main reason for this is selling everyone's > information (Identity Theft). It might be old news but the reason behind it > is money. > > **There were 5.5 billion attacks in 2011 compared to 3 billion attacks in > 2010. > > **Number in spamming dropped to 6.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 4.2 > million - but that's just to say that anybody shouldn't be fooled by that > number. > > **There were 403 million malware in 2011 compared to 2010's 28.6 million. > > **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. > > **There were 315 million MOBILE vulnerabilities in 2011 versus 163 million > in 2010. > > **It was noted that the US and China topped first and second, > respectively, on malicious activity by source overall. > > **The following sites were cosnidered vulnerable to a lot of malicious > attacks: > 1. religious/ideologies > 2. hosting/personal sites > 3. pornography > 4. entertainment/music > 5. economy > 6. technology/computer/Internet > 7. travel > 8. sports > 9. automobile > 10. shopping > > **Malware will continue to rise because cybercriminals are taking > advantage of social media. Social media is viral in nature and people are > less suspicious of content from friends. > > **QR codes are being used as an attack tool aka attack tagging - usually > deliver trojans and other malware. Read more about the Jester hacker. > > **Symantec did a study called "Project Honey Stick" where they left > iphones intentionally in several cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and > Washington D.C. Symantec tracked the phone's activities. They found out > that only 50% tried or even attempted to return; and 96% attempted personal > and app access. > > **Be careful of the wifi pineapple. > > **It took Symantec 18 seconds to hack an Android phone. > > > Have a great weekend! > > > Regards, > > Charity Gamboa-Embley > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Fri Oct 5 18:21:41 2012 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 17:21:41 -0500 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report #cyber security In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No problem Sala. Just a correction: **Number in spamming dropped 4.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 6.2 million .." Charity On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Charity for taking the time to share your notes with us. :) > > On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Charity Gamboa wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I attended a Symantec Security workshop/lecture at Texas Tech University >> last Thursday. The following report was presented by Nivk L. Kael, Senior >> Principal Security Strategist. Here are a few things I was able to note >> down: >> >> **Mr. Kael started by saying that there is a large number of hacking in >> universities globally. The main reason for this is selling everyone's >> information (Identity Theft). It might be old news but the reason behind it >> is money. >> >> **There were 5.5 billion attacks in 2011 compared to 3 billion attacks in >> 2010. >> >> **Number in spamming dropped to 6.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's >> 4.2 million - but that's just to say that anybody shouldn't be fooled by >> that number. >> >> **There were 403 million malware in 2011 compared to 2010's 28.6 million. >> >> **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. >> >> **There were 315 million MOBILE vulnerabilities in 2011 versus 163 >> million in 2010. >> >> **It was noted that the US and China topped first and second, >> respectively, on malicious activity by source overall. >> >> **The following sites were cosnidered vulnerable to a lot of malicious >> attacks: >> 1. religious/ideologies >> 2. hosting/personal sites >> 3. pornography >> 4. entertainment/music >> 5. economy >> 6. technology/computer/Internet >> 7. travel >> 8. sports >> 9. automobile >> 10. shopping >> >> **Malware will continue to rise because cybercriminals are taking >> advantage of social media. Social media is viral in nature and people are >> less suspicious of content from friends. >> >> **QR codes are being used as an attack tool aka attack tagging - usually >> deliver trojans and other malware. Read more about the Jester hacker. >> >> **Symantec did a study called "Project Honey Stick" where they left >> iphones intentionally in several cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and >> Washington D.C. Symantec tracked the phone's activities. They found out >> that only 50% tried or even attempted to return; and 96% attempted personal >> and app access. >> >> **Be careful of the wifi pineapple. >> >> **It took Symantec 18 seconds to hack an Android phone. >> >> >> Have a great weekend! >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Charity Gamboa-Embley >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Fri Oct 5 19:48:28 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 16:48:28 -0700 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <640016AA-8A4B-45D9-B3FE-0186F5FD427E@virtualized.org> Charity, Thanks for providing your notes. One question: On Oct 5, 2012, at 12:13 PM, Charity Gamboa wrote: > **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. Did Symantec explain what they meant by 'malicious domain'? Thanks, -drc -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 21:07:15 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 13:07:15 +1200 Subject: [governance] Readout of Internet Freedom Policy Workshop #US #Freedom Online #FoX #FoE Message-ID: Dear All, This was a Press Release by the US State Department, I wonder if anyone in the IGC attended and can give us their take on how it went. Apparently this is a buildup from the Freedom Online Conference hosted in Kenya recently Readout of Internet Freedom Policy Workshop Media Note Office of the Spokesperson Washington, DC October 5, 2012 ------------------------------ Over 100 representatives from companies, civil society groups, universities, and the U.S. Government discussed today’s toughest Internet freedom challenges at an Internet Freedom Policy Workshop hosted by the Department of State on Monday, October 1. Under Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Human Rights Maria Otero underscored the principle of openness by emphasizing the need to preserve the involvement of all stakeholders – the private sector, civil society, governments and others – in the future of Internet policy. Assistant Secretary Michael Posner facilitated a discussion on how to incorporate freedom of expression and privacy into Internet policy discussions with developing nations. Christopher Painter, Coordinator for Cyber Issues, spoke to U.S. advances promoting Internet freedom as part its comprehensive international cyber policy strategy. Under Secretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy, and the Environment Bob Hormats noted the importance of the upcoming World Conference on International Telecommunications negotiations for the preservation of Internet openness. He also encouraged U.S. companies to seek export licenses for certain connective technologies that can help the people of Syria, Iran, and other sanctioned countries to better communicate with each other and the outside world. Workshop participants discussed how to reconcile the goal of promoting Internet and mobile phone connectivity for people living in repressive environments, with the goal of denying repressive governments the capacity to track, monitor, and surveil their own people. Participants also reviewed practical steps that businesses can take to address their human rights impacts, including establishing systematic processes for handling human rights issues, engaging stakeholders before problems arise, and considering retroactive disclosure of decisions when immediate disclosure is not possible. The workshop builds on the accomplishments of the second Coalition for Freedom Online conference, which coordinates international diplomatic actions related to Internet freedom, hosted by Kenya on September 6-7. The Coalition also launched the Digital Defenders Partnership, an unprecedented collaboration among governments to provide emergency support for Internet users under threat for peacefully exercising their universal rights through new technologies. Tunisia announced it would become the Coalition’s 18th state and host the next conference in 2013. For more on the U.S. Government’s engagement on Internet freedom, visit www.humanrights.gov. PRN: 2012/1604 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Fri Oct 5 23:01:25 2012 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2012 10:01:25 +0700 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report #cyber security In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <506F9F05.4010706@gmx.net> On 10/6/2012 5:21 AM, Charity Gamboa wrote: > No problem Sala. > Just a correction: **Number in spamming dropped 4.2 million in 2011 > compared to 2010's 6.2 million .." > Charity I thought the second part of the sentence was the "explanation" that figures are "fallible": **Number in spamming dropped to 6.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 4.2 million - *but that's just to say that anybody shouldn't be fooled by that number.* Norbert Klein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 5 23:12:36 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 20:12:36 -0700 Subject: [governance] RE: [CommunityInformaticsCanada] NorthwesTel ... a corporate banana republic embedded in the northern economy.... In-Reply-To: <7f5ea64e9a7672939e740ecfa5229294.squirrel@www.flymail.web.ca> References: <7f5ea64e9a7672939e740ecfa5229294.squirrel@www.flymail.web.ca> Message-ID: <007e01cda370$83f94af0$8bebe0d0$@gmail.com> Maybe some lessons for other jurisdictions? M -----Original Message----- From: cracin-canada-owner at vancouvercommunity.net [mailto:cracin-canada-owner at vancouvercommunity.net] On Behalf Of media at web.net Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 1:23 PM To: L-CRACIN L-CRACIN Subject: [CommunityInformaticsCanada] NorthwesTel ... a corporate banana republic embedded in the northern economy.... "The sordid details of last week's telecommunications breakdown are well known, so I won't bore you with their goriness. Suffice to say the Yukon was dead in the water for a day, not only from a telecommunications perspective but, more importantly, from an economic perspective. Offices and businesses were unable to work. Stores were unable to sell. Money just stopped moving in the Yukon, or worse, it turned to smoke as thousands of workers sat idly by waiting for the problem to be resolved. In short, there were significant economic losses for the Yukon. There's no official estimate but I think it's safe to hazard a guess in the hundreds of thousands of dollars range. And our government couldn't do anything about it, other than sit around like the rest of us and wait for it to be fixed. Now that's a far cry from what happened when the roads washed out earlier this year. Government road crews took what some describe as heroic actions to fix highways to get traffic - and the economy - moving again. Telecommunications is every bit as important to our economy as other utilities like roads, arguably even more so.... the responsibility for telecommunications in the North belongs to just one privately-held company that is the business equivalent of Honduras - a corporate banana republic embedded in the northern economy. ... And the key problem with that is accountability. NorthwesTel doesn't have to answer to you or me or the Yukon government. NorthwesTel only answers to its corporate master, Bell. ..." FULL STORY http://yukon-news.com/opinions/columns/30392/#.UG3stV8XNa8.twitter -------------- 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 From bavouc at gmail.com Sat Oct 6 14:15:56 2012 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Martial Bavou[Private Business Account]) Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 19:15:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: HI Charity, Thanks sharing this with us, look great, but just few unclear points for me, what do they mean by: - **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. - It took Symantec 18 seconds to hack an Android phone. Thanks From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Charity Gamboa Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 8:14 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: charity.g.embley at ttu.edu Subject: [governance] Symantec Report Hi all, I attended a Symantec Security workshop/lecture at Texas Tech University last Thursday. The following report was presented by Nivk L. Kael, Senior Principal Security Strategist. Here are a few things I was able to note down: **Mr. Kael started by saying that there is a large number of hacking in universities globally. The main reason for this is selling everyone's information (Identity Theft). It might be old news but the reason behind it is money. **There were 5.5 billion attacks in 2011 compared to 3 billion attacks in 2010. **Number in spamming dropped to 6.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 4.2 million - but that's just to say that anybody shouldn't be fooled by that number. **There were 403 million malware in 2011 compared to 2010's 28.6 million. **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. **There were 315 million MOBILE vulnerabilities in 2011 versus 163 million in 2010. **It was noted that the US and China topped first and second, respectively, on malicious activity by source overall. **The following sites were cosnidered vulnerable to a lot of malicious attacks: 1. religious/ideologies 2. hosting/personal sites 3. pornography 4. entertainment/music 5. economy 6. technology/computer/Internet 7. travel 8. sports 9. automobile 10. shopping **Malware will continue to rise because cybercriminals are taking advantage of social media. Social media is viral in nature and people are less suspicious of content from friends. **QR codes are being used as an attack tool aka attack tagging - usually deliver trojans and other malware. Read more about the Jester hacker. **Symantec did a study called "Project Honey Stick" where they left iphones intentionally in several cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington D.C. Symantec tracked the phone's activities. They found out that only 50% tried or even attempted to return; and 96% attempted personal and app access. **Be careful of the wifi pineapple. **It took Symantec 18 seconds to hack an Android phone. Have a great weekend! Regards, Charity Gamboa-Embley -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Sun Oct 7 12:01:01 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2012 13:01:01 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <5071A73D.9060202@cafonso.ca> Dear people, I thank everyone who indicated my name (Carlos A. Afonso, "c.a.") as speaker, and understand this is an indication for one of two speakers on behalf of a stakeholder group. When I accepted this mission to do a similar speech on Dec.12, 2003, at Plenary Session 4 of WSIS in Geneva, we built the speech collectively -- not an easy task, we all know! So, anyone who will be speaking there on our (civil society's) behalf, should in my view do the same, voicing a carefully, collectively prepared consensus discourse. fraternal regards --c.a. ps: bluntly, I do not feel represented by an American USAID contractor living in Washington DC. There several other excellent suggestions. On 10/03/2012 02:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce > -C > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder > wrote: > > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: >> >> + 1 >> >> The best choice! > > Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for > Carlos Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy > either way) . parminder >> >> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: >>> +1 Carlos from Brazil >>> >>> Enviado desde mi iPhone >>> >>> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: >>> >>>> Colleagues, >>>> >>>> >>>> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. >>>> >>>> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. >>>> >>>> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: >>>> >>>> http://www.katypearce.net/ >>>> >>>> >>>> regards >>>> >>>> Robert >>>> -- >>>> R. Guerra >>>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 >>>> Twitter:twitter.com/netfreedom >>>> Email:rguerra at privaterra.org >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>>> Dear list, >>>>> >>>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, >>>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. >>>>> >>>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. >>>>> >>>>> izumi >>>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Sun Oct 7 16:08:33 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2012 22:08:33 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <5071A73D.9060202@cafonso.ca> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <5071A73D.9060202@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <1756018900.91849.1349640513818.JavaMail.www@wwinf1j35> You're right, Carlos. I remembrer fairly well these discussions, and the general consens the CS plenary asked for. This is still valid for me. Warm gratulations for your "mandate" and "bonne chance" in Baku ! Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 07/10/12 18:01 > De : "Carlos A. Afonso" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > Copie à : "parminder" > Objet : Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > Dear people, > > I thank everyone who indicated my name (Carlos A. Afonso, "c.a.") as > speaker, and understand this is an indication for one of two speakers on > behalf of a stakeholder group. > > When I accepted this mission to do a similar speech on Dec.12, 2003, at > Plenary Session 4 of WSIS in Geneva, we built the speech collectively -- > not an easy task, we all know! > > So, anyone who will be speaking there on our (civil society's) behalf, > should in my view do the same, voicing a carefully, collectively > prepared consensus discourse. > > fraternal regards > > --c.a. > > ps: bluntly, I do not feel represented by an American USAID contractor > living in Washington DC. There several other excellent suggestions. > > On 10/03/2012 02:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > > This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce > > -C > > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: > >> > >> + 1 > >> > >> The best choice! > > > > Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for > > Carlos Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy > > either way) . parminder > >> > >> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: > >>> +1 Carlos from Brazil > >>> > >>> Enviado desde mi iPhone > >>> > >>> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: > >>> > >>>> Colleagues, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society experts for the Baku main session. > >>>> > >>>> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > >>>> > >>>> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and work is available at her website: > >>>> > >>>> http://www.katypearce.net/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> regards > >>>> > >>>> Robert > >>>> -- > >>>> R. Guerra > >>>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > >>>> Twitter:twitter.com/netfreedom > >>>> Email:rguerra at privaterra.org > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >>>>> Dear list, > >>>>> > >>>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > >>>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > >>>>> > >>>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > >>>>> > >>>>> izumi > >>>>> > >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >> > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Sun Oct 7 18:11:54 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2012 19:11:54 -0300 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <1756018900.91849.1349640513818.JavaMail.www@wwinf1j35> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <5071A73D.9060202@cafonso.ca> <1756018900.91849.1349640513818.JavaMail.www@wwinf1j35> Message-ID: <5071FE2A.10202@cafonso.ca> Merci, cher Jean-Louis! --c.a. On 10/07/2012 05:08 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > You're right, Carlos. I remembrer fairly well these discussions, and the > general consens the CS plenary asked for. This is still valid for me. > Warm gratulations for your "mandate" and "bonne chance" in Baku ! > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > Message du 07/10/12 18:01 > > De : "Carlos A. Afonso" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > > Copie à : "parminder" > > Objet : Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > > > Dear people, > > > > I thank everyone who indicated my name (Carlos A. Afonso, "c.a.") as > > speaker, and understand this is an indication for one of two > speakers on > > behalf of a stakeholder group. > > > > When I accepted this mission to do a similar speech on Dec.12, > 2003, at > > Plenary Session 4 of WSIS in Geneva, we built the speech > collectively -- > > not an easy task, we all know! > > > > So, anyone who will be speaking there on our (civil society's) > behalf, > > should in my view do the same, voicing a carefully, collectively > > prepared consensus discourse. > > > > fraternal regards > > > > --c.a. > > > > ps: bluntly, I do not feel represented by an American USAID > contractor > > living in Washington DC. There several other excellent suggestions. > > > > On 10/03/2012 02:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > > > This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce > > > -C > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: > > >> > > >> + 1 > > >> > > >> The best choice! > > > > > > Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for > > > Carlos Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about > Katy > > > either way) . parminder > > >> > > >> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: > > >>> +1 Carlos from Brazil > > >>> > > >>> Enviado desde mi iPhone > > >>> > > >>> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra escribió: > > >>> > > >>>> Colleagues, > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil > Society experts for the Baku main session. > > >>>> > > >>>> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the > region very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been > an excellent resource for those of us who have been wanting to > better know and understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > > >>>> > > >>>> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research > and work is available at her website: > > >>>> > > >>>> http://www.katypearce.net/ > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> regards > > >>>> > > >>>> Robert > > >>>> -- > > >>>> R. Guerra > > >>>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > > >>>> Twitter:twitter.com/netfreedom > > >>>> Email:rguerra at privaterra.org > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > >>>>> Dear list, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main > session, > > >>>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing > session. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> izumi > > >>>>> > > >>>> ____________________________________________________________ > > >>>> 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 > > >> > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Oct 8 04:21:33 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 20:21:33 +1200 Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains Message-ID: Dear All, See the Application via http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/verisign-dnssec.pdf Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Oct 8 05:02:26 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 21:02:26 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, I forgot to say that it reminds me of what the Director General of WIPO had mentioned in relation to patenting the internet which was reported exactly this time last year, 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 Sala On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > See the Application via > http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/verisign-dnssec.pdf > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Oct 8 10:05:50 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 14:05:50 +0000 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <5071A73D.9060202@cafonso.ca> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <5071A73D.9060202@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224B39A@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Hurrah for Carlos, for this statesmanlike approach. > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Carlos A. Afonso > Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2012 12:01 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Chaitanya Dhareshwar > Cc: parminder > Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > Dear people, > > I thank everyone who indicated my name (Carlos A. Afonso, "c.a.") as > speaker, and understand this is an indication for one of two speakers on > behalf of a stakeholder group. > > When I accepted this mission to do a similar speech on Dec.12, 2003, at > Plenary Session 4 of WSIS in Geneva, we built the speech collectively -- > not an easy task, we all know! > > So, anyone who will be speaking there on our (civil society's) behalf, > should in my view do the same, voicing a carefully, collectively > prepared consensus discourse. > > fraternal regards > > --c.a. > > ps: bluntly, I do not feel represented by an American USAID contractor > living in Washington DC. There several other excellent suggestions. > > On 10/03/2012 02:27 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > > This one? http://www.linkedin.com/in/kpearce > > -C > > > > On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:55 AM, parminder > > wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday 03 October 2012 10:49 AM, parminder wrote: > >> > >> + 1 > >> > >> The best choice! > > > > Sorry, no offence intended to anyone but my endorsement was for > > Carlos Afonso. Apologies once again (I dont know anything about Katy > > either way) . parminder > >> > >> On Wednesday 03 October 2012 04:36 AM, Carlos Vera Quintana wrote: > >>> +1 Carlos from Brazil > >>> > >>> Enviado desde mi iPhone > >>> > >>> El 02/10/2012, a las 16:14, Robert Guerra > escribió: > >>> > >>>> Colleagues, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I would like to nominate Katy Pearce as one of the Civil Society > experts for the Baku main session. > >>>> > >>>> Katy is an academic expert who knows the Azerbaijan and the region > very well. She knows the country and its dynamics. She's been an excellent > resource for those of us who have been wanting to better know and > understand Azerbaijan in the lead up to the IGF. > >>>> > >>>> I recommend her without reservation.Details on her research and > work is available at her website: > >>>> > >>>> http://www.katypearce.net/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> regards > >>>> > >>>> Robert > >>>> -- > >>>> R. Guerra > >>>> Phone/Cell: +1 202-905-2081 > >>>> Twitter:twitter.com/netfreedom > >>>> Email:rguerra at privaterra.org > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 02/10/12 11:45, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >>>>> Dear list, > >>>>> > >>>>> We need to select Civil Society speakers for the Baku Main session, > >>>>> I think one for the opening and another for the closing session. > >>>>> > >>>>> Please send your suggestions and nominations asap. > >>>>> > >>>>> izumi > >>>>> > >>>> > __________________________________________________________ > __ > >>>> 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 > >> > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > __ > > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Oct 8 10:12:31 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 14:12:31 +0000 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report #cyber security In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224B3AD@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Remember that estimates (and they are _estimates_) of the "growth" of such things as "the number of attacks" or "malicious domains" needs to take into account the growth of the number of Internet users and growth in the number of devices connected to the internet. The fact that US and China top the list of malicious activity, probably has something to do with the fact that China and the US are #1 and #2 in the number of Internet users. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Charity Gamboa Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 6:22 PM To: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] Symantec Report #cyber security No problem Sala. Just a correction: **Number in spamming dropped 4.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 6.2 million .." Charity On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > wrote: Thank you Charity for taking the time to share your notes with us. :) On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Charity Gamboa > wrote: Hi all, I attended a Symantec Security workshop/lecture at Texas Tech University last Thursday. The following report was presented by Nivk L. Kael, Senior Principal Security Strategist. Here are a few things I was able to note down: **Mr. Kael started by saying that there is a large number of hacking in universities globally. The main reason for this is selling everyone's information (Identity Theft). It might be old news but the reason behind it is money. **There were 5.5 billion attacks in 2011 compared to 3 billion attacks in 2010. **Number in spamming dropped to 6.2 million in 2011 compared to 2010's 4.2 million - but that's just to say that anybody shouldn't be fooled by that number. **There were 403 million malware in 2011 compared to 2010's 28.6 million. **There were 55,294 malicious domains in 2011 versus 42,296 in 2010. **There were 315 million MOBILE vulnerabilities in 2011 versus 163 million in 2010. **It was noted that the US and China topped first and second, respectively, on malicious activity by source overall. **The following sites were cosnidered vulnerable to a lot of malicious attacks: 1. religious/ideologies 2. hosting/personal sites 3. pornography 4. entertainment/music 5. economy 6. technology/computer/Internet 7. travel 8. sports 9. automobile 10. shopping **Malware will continue to rise because cybercriminals are taking advantage of social media. Social media is viral in nature and people are less suspicious of content from friends. **QR codes are being used as an attack tool aka attack tagging - usually deliver trojans and other malware. Read more about the Jester hacker. **Symantec did a study called "Project Honey Stick" where they left iphones intentionally in several cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington D.C. Symantec tracked the phone's activities. They found out that only 50% tried or even attempted to return; and 96% attempted personal and app access. **Be careful of the wifi pineapple. **It took Symantec 18 seconds to hack an Android phone. Have a great weekend! Regards, Charity Gamboa-Embley ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Mon Oct 8 11:44:09 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 17:44:09 +0200 Subject: [governance] Symantec Report #cyber security In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224B3AD@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224B3AD@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: +1 On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Remember that estimates (and they are _estimates_) of the "growth" of > such things as "the number of attacks" or "malicious domains" needs to take > into account the growth of the number of Internet users and growth in the > number of devices connected to the internet. **** > > ** ** > > The fact that US and China top the list of malicious activity, probably > has something to do with the fact that China and the US are #1 and #2 in > the number of Internet users. **** > > ** ** > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Mon Oct 8 11:52:20 2012 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2012 15:52:20 +0000 Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I don't know enough about patent law to know how broad the implications of this are. If this application is successful would it apply to all transfers of DNSSEC enabled domains? Kerry Brown From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro Sent: October-08-12 1:22 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains Dear All, See the Application via http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/verisign-dnssec.pdf Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fahd.batayneh at gmail.com Tue Oct 9 02:57:55 2012 From: fahd.batayneh at gmail.com (Fahd A. Batayneh) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 09:57:55 +0300 Subject: [governance] Arab IGF I Day I Message-ID: Colleagues, for those interested in attending the inaugural Arab IGF in Kuwait can do so online at http://arabigf.kits.org.kw/livestream/. Today is day I, and will run until Thursday. Fahd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int Tue Oct 9 06:32:00 2012 From: karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int (karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int) Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2012 12:32:00 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: WCIT-12 Briefing session for Civil Society Stakeholders and other interested parties Message-ID: <20121009123200.16776sjocpmnwk68@mail1.itu.ch> Dear all, My apology for cross posting if you already received this link. Thanks Karim, Comoros -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: "SG-Registration, ITU" Subject: WCIT-12 Briefing session for Civil Society Stakeholders and other interested parties Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 07:45:27 +0000 Size: 6263 URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 9 08:35:54 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 05:35:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) Message-ID: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear all Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry visa. This is the mail that airline companies will require before boarding you. It has a list 200+ names If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you need the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it Best Nnenna -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 9 08:36:55 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 05:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) Message-ID: <1349786215.29996.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear all Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry visa. This is the mail that airline companies will require before boarding you. It has a list 200+ names If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you need the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it Best Nnenna -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Tue Oct 9 08:36:52 2012 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 13:36:52 +0100 Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In message , at 15:52:20 on Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Kerry Brown writes >I don?t know enough about patent law to know how broad the implications >of this are. If this application is successful would it apply to all >transfers of DNSSEC enabled domains I always understood that the IETF would not approve processes that relied upon patented technology, and therefore this would have to be just one way to transfer domains with other "open" methods existing alongside. But I haven't looked into this particular one. -- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Oct 9 10:32:25 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 02:32:25 +1200 Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Roland Perry < roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote: > In message <**A0615421071EDD4A9F851117D67D53** > 8A7EEC935A at EXCH01.KDBSystems.**local>, at 15:52:20 on Mon, 8 Oct 2012, > Kerry Brown writes > >> I don?t know enough about patent law to know how broad the implications >> of this are. If this application is successful would it apply to all >> transfers of DNSSEC enabled domains >> > > I always understood that the IETF would not approve processes that relied > upon patented technology, and therefore this would have to be just one way > to transfer domains with other "open" methods existing alongside. But I > haven't looked into this particular one. > -- > Roland Perry > > Frank Martin had sent these links: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-koch-dnsop-dnssec-operator-change-04 http://www.businessinsider.com/google-crowdsourcing-2012-9 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Tue Oct 9 10:37:31 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 07:37:31 -0700 Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0EEEE318-1875-4B54-931C-8EC30D58C6ED@virtualized.org> Roland, On Oct 9, 2012, at 5:36 AM, Roland Perry wrote: > In message , at 15:52:20 on Mon, 8 Oct 2012, Kerry Brown writes >> I don?t know enough about patent law to know how broad the implications of this are. If this application is successful would it apply to all transfers of DNSSEC enabled domains > > I always understood that the IETF would not approve processes that relied upon patented technology, Not quite. The IETF requires folks to disclose IPR claims and their licensing terms during the working group process. The working group then can decide on whether to include the technology subject to those claims in the working group product. See http://www.ietf.org/ipr/, RFC 3979 and RFC 4879. In practice, the IETF does tend to strongly avoid technologies that are encumbered with IPR, however sometimes it's necessary (perhaps ironically, DNSSEC was a bit hampered initially in that it relied on patented technology, RSA). The key consideration is typically whether the IPR holder is willing to license their technology in "a) under a royalty-free and otherwise reasonable and non-discriminatory license, or b) under a license that contains reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions, including a reasonable royalty or other payment, or c) without the need to obtain a license from the IPR holder." (from RFC 3979). > and therefore this would have to be just one way to transfer domains with other "open" methods existing alongside. But I haven't looked into this particular one. There has been some discussion about published prior art to this particular patent. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Tue Oct 9 10:48:04 2012 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 11:48:04 -0300 Subject: [governance] Philippine Cybercrime Prevention Act temporarily suspended Message-ID: I got this news from a friend (Pedro Bernardo) who's a law professor at Ateneo Law School in the Philippines: "the Philippine Supreme Court issued a 120-day temporary restraining order preventing the government from enforcing the Cybercrime Prevention Act; this is, until the court hears oral arguments on the issue in mid-January next year." Looks like the discussion is anything but over. Best, Ivar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: enbanc10.9.2012.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 242904 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Oct 9 10:56:04 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 02:56:04 +1200 Subject: [governance] Philippine Cybercrime Prevention Act temporarily suspended In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: There were also recent attacks on government websites in protest of the Act. On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann wrote: > I got this news from a friend (Pedro Bernardo) who's a law professor at > Ateneo Law School in the Philippines: > > "the Philippine Supreme Court issued a 120-day temporary restraining order > preventing the government from enforcing the Cybercrime Prevention Act; > this is, until the court hears oral arguments on the issue in mid-January > next year." > > Looks like the discussion is anything but over. > Best, > Ivar > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From bavouc at gmail.com Tue Oct 9 15:52:51 2012 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Martial Bavou[Private Business Account]) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 20:52:51 +0100 Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) In-Reply-To: <1349786215.29996.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1349786215.29996.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Thanks Nnenna, My name is on the list. -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Nnenna Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 1:37 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) Dear all Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry visa. This is the mail that airline companies will require before boarding you. It has a list 200+ names If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you need the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it Best Nnenna -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Tue Oct 9 17:07:00 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 21:07:00 +0000 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. Ginger and colleagues: Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so... let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development...I defer to others there. Human rights CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint. Security and Securitization CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs. Multistakeholderism Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Oct 9 17:18:29 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2012 17:18:29 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: good start Milton! -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > > From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque > > I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not > 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as > their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking > abilities when we nominate them. > > > > Ginger and colleagues: > > Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been > any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more > important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is > the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" > at the moment, so… > > > > let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately > believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address > them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope > others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, > development…I defer to others there. > > > > Human rights > > CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global > communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of > the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of > information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to > freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national > Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny > individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. > All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal > and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and > should not involve prior restraint. > > > > Security and Securitization > > CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would > foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or > private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware > for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are > deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are > skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and > communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that > Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and > that national security and military agendas often work against rather than > for users' security needs. > > > > Multistakeholderism > > Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS > welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that > multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder > participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance > institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not > by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the > best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces > created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and > corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. > MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, > separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. > > > > 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Wed Oct 10 01:52:25 2012 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 06:52:25 +0100 Subject: [governance] Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: <20121009200658.52213.qmail@joyce.lan> References: <20121009200658.52213.qmail@joyce.lan> Message-ID: <7JQnAFDZ0QdQFAln@internetpolicyagency.com> In message <20121009200658.52213.qmail at joyce.lan>, at 20:06:58 on Tue, 9 Oct 2012, John Levine writes >>I always understood that the IETF would not approve processes that >>relied upon patented technology > >You've misunderstood. Since there's a link to their IPR documents >on the home page, that shouldn't be hard to clear up. Using the search engine there, and "Verisign" as a term, doesn't seem to show up anything related to the DNSSEC issue. Thanks to David Conrad for his reply too. -- 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Wed Oct 10 03:30:49 2012 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 02:30:49 -0500 Subject: [governance] Philippine Cybercrime Prevention Act temporarily suspended In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just an FYI, in pre-ISOC PH days I believe some organizations in the Philippines were consulted about drafting a cybercrime law. I think the main contention at that time was more of pushing for an e-commerce law. I remember this one since I was part of a group of entrepreneurs who was trained by the Philippine Youth Commission on Entrepreneurship. The business industry at that point in the Philippines was booming with a new administration in place. I was managing my family's business at that time so there was a lot of movement on pushing for e-commerce. I call it pre-ISOC PH because ISOC PH was rejuvenated sometime in early 2009. As far as I know, we in ISOC PH issued a position paper sometime in March of 2012 to Congress. But apparently, during bi-cameral, senate inserted some provisions that just did not pass a lot of scrutiny from different stakeholders.We are still discussing this and gathering opinions from our members. Hopefully, we can collate all views and turn in another position paper. On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > There were also recent attacks on government websites in protest of the > Act. > > On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 2:48 AM, Ivar A. M. Hartmann < > ivarhartmann at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I got this news from a friend (Pedro Bernardo) who's a law professor at >> Ateneo Law School in the Philippines: >> >> "the Philippine Supreme Court issued a 120-day temporary restraining >> order preventing the government from enforcing the Cybercrime Prevention >> Act; this is, until the court hears oral arguments on the issue in >> mid-January next year." >> >> Looks like the discussion is anything but over. >> Best, >> Ivar >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Oct 10 03:53:55 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:23:55 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50752993.3040204@itforchange.net> Verisign seeking patent over a 'governance process' should not be too surprising, given that there has been a substantial creep from 'public' governance methods to 'private' (or contractbased) governance methods. And many in the civil society here have enthusiastically supported this shift; so why lament now. ICANN proudly claims that it is not a regulator, it merely provides a platform for stakeholders (read, private interests) to negotiate, and the outcomes of these negotiations are operationalised by ICANN. An entirely innocent activity! Once you admit the basic proposition that governance, like the market, is founded on private parties negotiating on the basis of their self-interests, and not based on 'public' interest, the construction of which is a larger political process, you have basically given it all away. Why would not then one seek maximisation of private interest by patenting a governance process embodied in a software for securing the DNS system? Well, we can now negotiate with them and they may just agree to a system of only taking 'reasonable' royalty on their patent! To anyone trained in democratic thought, it is so unthinkably abhorrent that someone can even try to patent a governance process. But this is a post democratic period of multistakeholderism, where governance is through negotiation of private interests of different parties that can make to the table. BTW, on another count, the fact that US law allows software patents while most other jurisdictions (like India) do not allow software patents makes for a good case that the US law is not the best one (it is perhaps the worst one) for oversight of the bodies dealing with Internet's technical governance. Yes, this argument is directly addressed to those who have claimed the superiority, or even the appropriateness, of oversight of US law/courts/ executive over the ICANN against other possible jurisdictions. Parminder On Monday 08 October 2012 02:32 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > I forgot to say that it reminds me of what the Director General of > WIPO had mentioned in relation to patenting the internet which was > reported exactly this time last year, 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 > > Sala > > > On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > > wrote: > > Dear All, > > See the Application via > http://domainnamewire.com/wp-content/verisign-dnssec.pdf > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Oct 10 04:07:18 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 13:37:18 +0530 Subject: [governance] Google's officer with detention order in brasil In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223FF98@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223FF98@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <50752CB6.40603@itforchange.net> On Monday 01 October 2012 08:29 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > Parminder, > > In my opinion your responses and statements continue to take the form > of crude leftist propaganda rather than real dialogue. But I > understand that you, like most propagandists, get a lot of mileage out > of simply repeating the same message over and over agas/in until > people grow weary of responding. So I will make some perfunctory > efforts to respond just to demonstrate that most of us are not > intimidated by aggressive repetition of invalid arguments. > Milton, you can do with some amount of deflation of your oversized ego before others do it for you, and try to speak to people rather than down to them. If you cant hold a political dialogue, you always have the right to opt out. But you dont have to get so angry just because you have no answers to simple direct questions like; why opting out of 'dumb' Brazilian laws and judges is such a good idea and not opting out of dumb US laws and judges; or what is the next step for ICANN system's internationalisation, or for the democratisation of the kind of Internet policies that OECD's CICCP makes, in the networked transnational system that you seem to propose, and insist that everyone must read about it (only) in your book . Well, you can call repeating these simple and most important global IG questions as propaganda as a device to avoid answering them, but to me, and many others here, these remain central to the our discussion(s). > > snip. > > MM: Then you are simply ignorant, and need to do your reading. > > snip > > You are really quite comical. > As I said, beware, Prof! parminder (PS: Will respond to substantive parts of your email separately.) > At least the communists and socialists of the 1920s were dealing with > life-and-death issues in regard to their critique of business. If you > are going to wage an international war against the depredations of big > business, you had better come up with something more substantive than > Google's terms of use applied to people getting free service, or its > resistance to silly and obstructive local laws regarding video > takedowns. And we all know that if Google took down videos > arbitrarily, you would be criticizing them for that, as well. It's > very clear where your simple-minded politics are coming from. > > > On the other hand, I do understand that in the new neoliberal global > world order, their is this new political direction of richer classes > in most countries (especially, but not only, developing countries) to > seek to opt out of the democratic order they are 'subject to' in > favour of a new post-democratic global order whose political capital > lies in the US, because whether they like it or not, any new system > still needs some kind of political coercive authority, for instance to > make those early dawn knocks to catch people doing things as dangerous > as sharing video files. > > Again, there is no coherent political or legal argument here, there is > simply 1970s-vintage foaming at the mouth against "US imperialism". > Should the world ever be unfortunate enough to put you and your ideas > in a position of power and responsibility, you will soon learn - as > did all the 'anti-imperialist' socialist dictatorships and economic > failures in the developing world of the 1970s - that simply being > against the US does not produce anything of value for subject > populations. You have to have a substantive agenda. > > > you have said that US laws and judges are good and should continue to > overlord over the ICANN (for whatever 'minimalist' areas that you lay > down). > > Another crude distortion. We have had a debate about California > nonprofit incorporation law. ICANN has to incorporate somewhere, and I > have said that in terms of public accountability, which you claim to > support, that California law is as good as any, and that it is BETTER > than international organization laws, which immunize organizations > from all kinds of things. You are basically claiming that a treaty can > be devised that is better, but no such treaty exists! And given the > realities of inter-state political bargaining, there is very little > likelihood that the outcome of a treaty process would be better. You > have lost this argument, obviously, so your only recourse is to > return to your anti-US mantra and claim that I support US as "overlord." > > I think most people can see through this. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From b.schombe at gmail.com Wed Oct 10 04:11:01 2012 From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 09:11:01 +0100 Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) In-Reply-To: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Nnenna, thanks and my name is on. SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN Téléphone mobile:+243998983491 email : b.schombe at gmail.com skype : b.schombe blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr Site Web : www.ticafrica.net 2012/10/9 Nnenna > > Dear all > > Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry visa. > This is the mail that airline companies will require before boarding you. > It has a list 200+ names > > If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you need > the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it > > Best > > Nnenna > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 10 05:10:54 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 02:10:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> +1 On each of the points below.  I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited.  However, I would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or think it is an NGO thing. Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own Best Nnenna   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Milton L Mueller To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku   From:gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them.   Ginger and colleagues: Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message."  At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so…     let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development…I defer to others there.   Human rights CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint.   Security and Securitization CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs.   Multistakeholderism Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself.  Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights.   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.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: -------------- 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 From amalidesilva at yahoo.com Wed Oct 10 06:02:08 2012 From: amalidesilva at yahoo.com (Amali De Silva) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 03:02:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1349863328.91484.YahooMailNeo@web112317.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> when formulating human rights approaches we should always remember that the framework is based on some concepts that include: respect for the individual and the community of writing and reading compassion for feelings of others in the community of writing and reading concept of "reasonable" in the community of wirting and reading  the application of intents content in a reasonable manner the laws of the applicable individual and connected jurisdiction(s)  interpretations of the laws of the jurisdictions with respect to the reasonable position  the questions of what is neutral content vs what requires moderation by a panel of moderators for instance as to the broad based principles of governance for regional content - perhaps based on the WSIS regional caucuses understanding regional issues and stakeholder groups - should there be a second tier of human rights moderators on internet issues ? : top tier - global ; second tier - regional aspects and application understandings group  See article below  Regional Security Councils – A Way Towards UN ReformFebruary 18, 201 link to  content at: http://www.island.lk/index.php?page_cat=article-details&page=article-details&code_title=45576  The article noted above is a proposal by my father. This is a reflection of mine regarding the internet, based on his article.  Thank you.  Amali De Silva - Mitchell ( Former President Vancouver Community Network Canada - Participant WSIS )  This is a personal note and in no way reflects the opinions of any organization.        ________________________________ From: Nnenna To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Milton L Mueller Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 10:10:54 AM Subject: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku +1 On each of the points below.  I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited.  However, I would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or think it is an NGO thing. Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own Best Nnenna   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Milton L Mueller To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku   From:gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them.   Ginger and colleagues: Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message."  At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so…     let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development…I defer to others there.   Human rights CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint.   Security and Securitization CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs.   Multistakeholderism Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself.  Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights.   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.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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Oct 10 11:01:29 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 08:01:29 -0700 Subject: [governance] WSIS Forum 2013: Invitation to contribute to the Open Consultation Process on the Message-ID: <01ea01cda6f8$4ddbc0c0$e9934240$@gmail.com> Comments? M WSIS Forum 2013: Invitation to contribute to the Open Consultation Process on the Thematic Aspects and innovations on the Format Dear Sir/Madam, Following the outcomes of the WSIS Action Line Facilitators meetings during the WSIS Forum 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012 and the exchange of views amongst several WSIS stakeholders, the organizers of the WSIS Forum, ITU, UNESCO, UNCTAD and UNDP are pleased to announce the Open Consultation Process on the thematic aspects and innovations on the format of the WSIS Forum 2013. This consultation process aims at ensuring the participatory and inclusive spirit of the WSIS Forum 2013, scheduled to be held from 13 to 17 May at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, by actively engaging governments, civil society, the private sector and intergovernmental organizations in the preparatory process. The Open Consultation Process for the WSIS Forum 2013 is structured in five phases as follows: Phase I : 8 October 2012 Opening of the Open Consultations: . Online Dialogues on the WSIS Knowledge Communities . Official submissions at wsis-info at itu.int Phase II : 16 November 2012 First Physical Meeting Phase III : 21 January 2013 Deadline for Submission of the Official Contributions and binding requests for Workshops Phase IV : 15 February 2013 Final Review Meeting (3 months prior to the meeting) Phase V : 16 April 2013 Final Brief on the WSIS Forum 2013 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From sdkaaa at gmail.com Thu Oct 11 03:36:12 2012 From: sdkaaa at gmail.com (Bernard Sadaka) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 10:36:12 +0300 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012: Call for remote Hubs Message-ID: Dear All, As we approach the IGF 2012 meeting, which is being held on 6-9 November 2012 in Baku, Azerbaijan, the IGF Secretariat will once again be providing remote participation facilities this year. Many of us within the IG Caucus community will not be able to attend and some of us would require to invite others to actively take part of the debates. Taking into consideration the importance of the global as well as local debates, the IGF Secretariat has issued a call for the setting up remote hubs in our countries/institutions as well as providing technical support in the form of training on the remote platform as well as email support. So what are remote hubs? A remote hub is a group of people (5 or more) with common interest in an IGF theme/session who gather in a room and remotely watch the video/audio and text of one or more of the workshops of the IGF in Baku as well as send their feedback via chat, audio and/or video. What can you do to participate? - Tell your colleagues/friends/acquaintances about your hub - Register your hub at: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/hub-registration-2012 - Prepare an adequate room at office or home with a computer, Internet, audio system and a projector - Follow a training at: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/trainings-2012 - Choose some interesting workshops for you and your colleagues/friends/acquaintances from the latest programme (on home page: http://www.intgovforum.org/) and invite them to join you at the time of that workshop. - You will be able to chat with that workshop as well as send an audio/video intervention. Should you have any question regarding remote participation, please do not hesitate to contact me at: bsadaka at unog.ch Looking forward to your active engagement, feedback and participation. All the best, Bernard -- Bernard Sadaka More info: - General information about remote participation: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation - Details and instructions regarding the organisation of a remote hub: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/hubs-instructions - Hub registration at http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/hub-registration-2012 - Remote Participation trainings for remote hubs coordinators are scheduled at http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/trainings-2012 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Thu Oct 11 04:24:09 2012 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:24:09 +0500 Subject: [governance] Closing of online registration for Baku IGF and start of Onsite Registration Date Message-ID: Dear All, An update from IGF Secretariat that the online registration for the Seventh Annual IGF Meeting closes on Monday, 15 October whereas the onsite registration will start on Friday, 2 November at the Baku Expo Center. Best regards FoOoOoO? -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Thu Oct 11 06:37:38 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 03:37:38 -0700 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? Message-ID: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> Note, this flows from a discussion that initially took place on a listserve sponsored by ISOC on Internet Policy. I've changed the subject line here and I've copied the others involved in this thread (I'm not sure if they are or are not subbed to the Community Informatics or the governance lists) but I know that they all have a deep knowledge and interest in this subject. I'm also putting all of this below up on my blog http://gurstein.wordpress.com where those with an interest might wish to carry forward this discussion. The extended discussion is probably only for those with an interest in Internet Governance issues and particularly as they apply to the regulatory regimes (and policy stances) of Less Developed Countries and I would point those with such an interest to research papers prepared by Michael Kende of the consulting firm AnalysysMason on behalf of Amazon, AT&T, Cisco Systems, Comcast, Google, Intel, Juniper Networks, Microsoft, National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA), News Corporation, Oracle, Telefónica, Time Warner Cable, Verisign, and Verizon. specifically: https://fileshare.tools.isoc.org/wentworth/public/ISOC%20WCIT%20statements%2 0 &%20resources/Analysys_Mason_RDRK0_driving_broadband_Africa_Dec2011%20copy.p df and http://www.analysysmason.com/About-Us/News/Press-releases1/Internet-global-g rowth-PR-Sept2012/?bp=http%3a%2f%2fwww.analysysmason.com%2fSearch%2f%23query %3dglobal%2binternet%2bgrowth%26access%3dAll+content I should say that both of these reports are very interesting and contain a wealth of good information, however, the problem that I have with them and particularly the second report is that it so clearly starts off with its policy conclusion and builds a case to support this. This is not an area of particular expertise for me as I indicate in my comments in the below but my gut is that the conclusions as to the appropriate policy regime for Less Developed Countries (the apparent target for the second policy report from Michael Kende) would look quite different if it was done from/by folks from LDC's rather than sponsored as Kende's report was by Google, Cisco, Amazon, Microsoft and so on and so on. I'm not exactly sure what the LDC sponsored report would say but my guess would be that they would focus rather more on looking at how costs and benefits are and should be distributed as between some of the wealthiest companies from some of the wealthiest countries and LDC's looking to increase Internet access overall in environments of very low incomes, very difficult physical environments, extremely weak regulatory and taxation regimes, and vast areas and populations who might under some circumstances derive benefit from Internet access but who would under almost any conceivable current situation find paying for this almost impossible. My hunch is that they wouldn't start out with indicating as the number one recommendation of the report -- the basic point of the overall report from what I can see -- the overwhelming importance of Promoting network infrastructure: (by a) Focus on increasing investments throughout the network, from mobile broadband access through national and cross-border connectivity and IXPs, by removing roadblocks to lower the cost of investment, including allocating spectrum for mobile broadband or limiting licensing requirements and fees, in order to promote competitive entry and growth. >From what I am seeing (and Kende's report is as good a signal as any) the Internet biggies are running a bit scared (the term "moral panic" comes to mind) as to what "madness" might come out of the WCIT meeting that the ITU is hosting in December in Dubai. And they are pulling out all the stops in trying to derail any real discussion on how the costs and benefits might be allocated of improving/extending Internet access in and into LDC's and within LDC's to the other 99% or so in those countries who currently have no possible means of access. This is of course because the ITU as the traditional venue for global telecom "governance" includes among its 195 or so Member States a very goodly proportion, probably a majority, who are currently experiencing net costs (including many regimes who see these costs in terms of lost political control) from Internet access and paticularly if attempts at extending access to rural and maginalized populations are taken into consideration, rather than net benefits and not surprisingly they are looking at ways of righting that balance. And so instead of actually sitting down and trying to figure out a global regime for Internet (and possibly other) governance, that might in some sense lead to an equitable distribution of costs and benefits the biggies are launching verbal, research and whatever types of broadsides infinite amounts of money, easy access to expertise and the current ascendance of neo-libertarian (anti-State, anti-tax) ideology can muster. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. The challenge I think is to recognize both of the above as equally likely/possible outcomes. This implies the need to design and implement a global regime which ensures the possibility of universal access to the benefits of the Internet while ensuring that the provision of these opportunities does not further enmiserate those currently least able to obtain these benefits at least in part by destroying the means by which such possible access to benefits could through public intervention, regulation and yes, even taxation ensure that such a possibility of benefits can be translated into actuality. Mike _____ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Oct 11 08:23:43 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:23:43 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal privacy protection in Internet governance. Best Bill On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: > +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or think it is an NGO thing. > > Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own > > Best > > Nnenna > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > From: Milton L Mueller > To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" > Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM > Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > > From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque > > I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. > > Ginger and colleagues: > Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so… > > let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development…I defer to others there. > > Human rights > CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint. > > Security and Securitization > CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs. > > Multistakeholderism > Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. > > 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.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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From katycarvt at gmail.com Thu Oct 11 08:42:49 2012 From: katycarvt at gmail.com (Katy P) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 05:42:49 -0700 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> Message-ID: What? When did this happen? On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: > In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly > disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have > speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of > personal privacy protection in Internet governance. > > Best > > Bill > > On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: > > +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire > Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I > would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active > national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some > countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear > overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or > think it is an NGO thing. > > Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that > "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own > > Best > > Nnenna > > > > Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants > Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development > Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 > Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org > nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Milton L Mueller > *To:* 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" < > governance at lists.igcaucus.org> > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM > *Subject:* RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku > > > *From:* gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Ginger > Paque > > I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' > not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as > significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as > well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. > > Ginger and colleagues: > Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there > been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more > important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is > the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" > at the moment, so… > > let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately > believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address > them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope > others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, > development…I defer to others there. > > Human rights > CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global > communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of > the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of > information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to > freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national > Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny > individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. > All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal > and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and > should not involve prior restraint. > > Security and Securitization > CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would > foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or > private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware > for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are > deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We > are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information > and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe > that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level > and that national security and military agendas often work against rather > than for users' security needs. > > Multistakeholderism > Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS > welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that > multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder > participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance > institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not > by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that > the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal > spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful > governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests > of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize > concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil > and political rights. > > 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.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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Thu Oct 11 08:49:47 2012 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:49:47 +0300 Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) In-Reply-To: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20121011124947.GN5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> On Oct 09 05:35, Nnenna (nne75 at yahoo.com) wrote: > Dear all > > Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry > visa. This is the mail that airline companies will require before > boarding you. It has a list 200+ names > If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you > need the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it Dear NNenna, Could you please forward it to me. Thank you. - I Hope to see you in Baku. In case you don't remember me, I'm the guy behind camera in this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSU346fkkSQ Best regards, -- Tapani Tarvainen Vice president, Electronic Frontier Finland email tapani.tarvainen at effi.org tel. +358-40-7293479 -------------- 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 From tapani.tarvainen at effi.org Thu Oct 11 08:52:12 2012 From: tapani.tarvainen at effi.org (Tapani Tarvainen) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:52:12 +0300 Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) In-Reply-To: <20121011124947.GN5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> References: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20121011124947.GN5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> Message-ID: <20121011125212.GO5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> Oops, that obviously was meant for Nnenna only. But I guess it goes to show how easily things sometimes spread wider than they should - I just realized that list is what Bill must've meant about distributing participants' passport numbers. Nnenna, I don't really need the list but I'd like to know if I'm in it. Tapani On Oct 11 15:49, Tapani Tarvainen (tapani.tarvainen at effi.org) wrote: > On Oct 09 05:35, Nnenna (nne75 at yahoo.com) wrote: > > > Dear all > > > > Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry > > visa. This is the mail that airline companies will require before > > boarding you. It has a list 200+ names > > > If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you > > need the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it > > Dear NNenna, > > Could you please forward it to me. Thank you. > > - I Hope to see you in Baku. In case you don't remember me, I'm the > guy behind camera in this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSU346fkkSQ > > Best regards, > > -- > Tapani Tarvainen > Vice president, Electronic Frontier Finland > email tapani.tarvainen at effi.org > tel. +358-40-7293479 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Oct 11 09:00:06 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 09:00:06 -0400 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> it's what they're sending registrants On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: > What? When did this happen? > > On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: > In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal privacy protection in Internet governance. > > Best > > Bill > > On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: > >> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or think it is an NGO thing. >> >> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >> >> Best >> >> Nnenna >> >> >> >> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >> >> From: Milton L Mueller >> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> >> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >> >> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. >> >> Ginger and colleagues: >> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so… >> >> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development…I defer to others there. >> >> Human rights >> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint. >> >> Security and Securitization >> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs. >> >> Multistakeholderism >> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >> >> 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.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 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Thu Oct 11 11:55:15 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:55:15 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein I should say that both of these reports are very interesting and contain a wealth of good information, however, the problem that I have with them and particularly the second report is that it so clearly starts off with its policy conclusion and builds a case to support this. [Milton L Mueller] moan. Yes, indeed. This is a commissioned study, by a consultancy that is in the business of serving the interests of its clients. The substance of the study is not terrible, it makes the standard case for the Internet model as we know it. But still, as someone who does real scholarly studies, I am always irritated by the fact that these kinds of paid-for pieces get 1,000 times more attention than an honest, objective scholarly study, and that even purportedly critical scholars such as yourself seem to take them more seriously than real research simply because it's easier to read and because it arrives on your virtual doorstep so easily and quickly via a publicity machine that generates "buzz" >From what I am seeing (and Kende's report is as good a signal as any) the Internet biggies are running a bit scared (the term "moral panic" comes to mind) as to what "madness" might come out of the WCIT meeting that the ITU is hosting in December in Dubai. [Milton L Mueller] As I have argued elsewhere, it is a bit of a panic, and one that has succeeded in stampeding a lot of public interest groups into it as well. And they are pulling out all the stops in trying to derail any real discussion on how the costs and benefits might be allocated of improving/extending Internet access in and into LDC's and within LDC's to the other 99% or so in those countries who currently have no possible means of access. This is of course because the ITU as the traditional venue for global telecom "governance" includes among its 195 or so Member States a very goodly proportion, probably a majority, who are currently experiencing net costs (including many regimes who see these costs in terms of lost political control) from Internet access and paticularly if attempts at extending access to rural and maginalized populations are taken into consideration, rather than net benefits and not surprisingly they are looking at ways of righting that balance. [Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can be soaked to "distribute" wealth to their favored businesses and political causes. This concern with "equitable distribution" inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who benefit from setting up the national toll booths. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From J.A.K.Cave at warwick.ac.uk Thu Oct 11 12:24:59 2012 From: J.A.K.Cave at warwick.ac.uk (Cave, Jonathan) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 16:24:59 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <5DF5E53B27521C46829E04DBEA8E905F48F6ED@DB3PRD0104MB152.eurprd01.prod.exchangelabs.com> I sit on both sides of this fence (yes, it is uncomfortable sometimes) and see a further issue of governance by proxy or even Potemkin governance. This cuts both ways. On one side, in many MDCs (the opposite of LDCs) the regulatory relationship with (esp.) incumbent telcos has become corrupted (if that's not too strong a term) by a combination of acknowledge information asymmetry and the use of regulatory traction to encourage the telcos to provide a range of public goods like universal service... The latter may be 'uneconomic' (or the regulators may have become convinced that they are). The central issue may be the conflation of the regulatory and public good provision roles of government, especially in countries without full regulatory independence (independent of government as well as of industry). The interests, evidence, analysis and policies "produced" by governments and by dominant firms may not be distinguishable even to the participants. In addition, the closeness of these relationships may lead to one side getting the bulk of its information from the other, leading to a particularly persistent form of capture. But this applies even to the 'serious academic' folks - if the reward for investigating questions of a contentious nature is access to otherwise unobtainable data and other evidence, and especially where contrasting data may not be so easy to come by or may not even have been recorded, selection bias makes a mockery of scientific rigour. It is one thing to insist that all available evidence be taken into account - this does not help when the 'other side of the story' is not adequately elicited or recorded. On the other hand, rejecting such analyses and the evidence on which they are based - rather than engaging with them initially on theoretical grounds and eventually on the basis of better evidence - is equally ineffective. How can such evidence be collected? In some cases by conducting natural experiments - and many LDCs are ideally suited for these, especially if the costs are reduced by the value of improved basis for policy decisions (and reducing the distortions due to 'capture'). I don't like the persistence of monopoly or the attempts to parlay incumbency in natural monopoly settings into control over markets where the incumbents do not have a particularly important role to play (e.g. sectors with weak recent and prospective innovation performance playing the innovation card in order to justify subsidy or policy influence in related sectors like the Internet). But I would not automatically assume that there are no forces driving towards monopoly (even if they are only 'tipping' externalities) or that competition supported by policies that minimise such externalities is better than tough-minded utility regulation that captures them in the public interest. I also see no reason to love persistence in regulatory monopoly. That's why I do love civil society participation. It can make the issues simpler - but hopefully not too simple. J. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: 11 October 2012 17:55 To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein I should say that both of these reports are very interesting and contain a wealth of good information, however, the problem that I have with them and particularly the second report is that it so clearly starts off with its policy conclusion and builds a case to support this. [Milton L Mueller] moan. Yes, indeed. This is a commissioned study, by a consultancy that is in the business of serving the interests of its clients. The substance of the study is not terrible, it makes the standard case for the Internet model as we know it. But still, as someone who does real scholarly studies, I am always irritated by the fact that these kinds of paid-for pieces get 1,000 times more attention than an honest, objective scholarly study, and that even purportedly critical scholars such as yourself seem to take them more seriously than real research simply because it's easier to read and because it arrives on your virtual doorstep so easily and quickly via a publicity machine that generates "buzz" >From what I am seeing (and Kende's report is as good a signal as any) the Internet biggies are running a bit scared (the term "moral panic" comes to mind) as to what "madness" might come out of the WCIT meeting that the ITU is hosting in December in Dubai. [Milton L Mueller] As I have argued elsewhere, it is a bit of a panic, and one that has succeeded in stampeding a lot of public interest groups into it as well. And they are pulling out all the stops in trying to derail any real discussion on how the costs and benefits might be allocated of improving/extending Internet access in and into LDC's and within LDC's to the other 99% or so in those countries who currently have no possible means of access. This is of course because the ITU as the traditional venue for global telecom "governance" includes among its 195 or so Member States a very goodly proportion, probably a majority, who are currently experiencing net costs (including many regimes who see these costs in terms of lost political control) from Internet access and paticularly if attempts at extending access to rural and maginalized populations are taken into consideration, rather than net benefits and not surprisingly they are looking at ways of righting that balance. [Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can be soaked to "distribute" wealth to their favored businesses and political causes. This concern with "equitable distribution" inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who benefit from setting up the national toll booths. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 11 16:10:39 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 08:10:39 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: <50752993.3040204@itforchange.net> References: <50752993.3040204@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Dear All, Here's my perspective: http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121011_perspective_on_verisign_patent_application_on_domain_transfers/ Kind Regards, Sala -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From otsienomartin at yahoo.com Fri Oct 12 01:02:31 2012 From: otsienomartin at yahoo.com (Martin McOsieno) Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? Message-ID: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Hi  Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? http://www.thedomains.com/2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-sends-third-letter-to-icann-alleging-conflict-of-interest-issues-with-its-board-members-over-africa/  http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/     Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Fri Oct 12 01:58:55 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 11:28:55 +0530 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5077B19F.1040808@itforchange.net> On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: > Hi > > Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This > time on .africa? But isnt the problem of conflict of interest structural to multistakeholder (MS) governance (not multistakeholder policy inputs, but actual governance) because MS governance is about those who have interest (or stake) being part of decision making processes. ICANN board and its various decision making committees, for instance, are full of people from the domain name industry, an industry that ICANN is supposed to regulate. Could one, coming from an old fashioned democratic tradition, even think of US's Federal Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory Authority of India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel respectively! No, certainly not, it would be unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's world of MSism . Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is window dressing, when the going, and the press, becomes too blatantly bad, as in the case of their former Chairman's misadventures. Otherwise, in the game as usual it is interested parties laying global CIR policies all the way, and the public or the supposed reps of the public sit in the gallery and clap enthusiastically about the untold wonders of MSism. This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say “Icann must place commercial and financial interests in their appropriate context,” said Mr. Beckstrom, who is scheduled to step down from his post in July. “How can it do this if all top leadership is from the very domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate independently? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest in ICANN at http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923 . Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the democratic system of governance in India, but I can assure you that if any governmental/policy organisation in India approached anywhere near the conflict of interest mess that ICANN is, it would take one public interest litigation to the high court or supreme court to get it folded up in a matter of days, even if the government itself does not fold it up (which too I am sure it would do on its own). parminder > > http://www.thedomains.com/2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-sends-third-letter-to-icann-alleging-conflict-of-interest-issues-with-its-board-members-over-africa/ > > > http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/ > > > Martin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 12 02:46:56 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 15:46:56 +0900 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> Thanks Milton for your comments and few back to you as well. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein I should say that both of these reports are very interesting and contain a wealth of good information, however, the problem that I have with them and particularly the second report is that it so clearly starts off with its policy conclusion and builds a case to support this. [Milton L Mueller] moan. Yes, indeed. This is a commissioned study, by a consultancy that is in the business of serving the interests of its clients. The substance of the study is not terrible, it makes the standard case for the Internet model as we know it. But still, as someone who does real scholarly studies, I am always irritated by the fact that these kinds of paid-for pieces get 1,000 times more attention than an honest, objective scholarly study, and that even purportedly critical scholars such as yourself seem to take them more seriously than real research simply because it's easier to read and because it arrives on your virtual doorstep so easily and quickly via a publicity machine that generates "buzz" [MG>] Well yes, except that my intention was not "academic" or "scholarly" but rather to make a critical comment on a "politically" significant document--i.e. one that will likely (and certainly was intented to) be read by political/policy influentials who are very unlikely to come across a scholarly piece however well structured its methodology or execution. The point wasn't that it was bad "research" but rather it was ideology purporting to be research. >From what I am seeing (and Kende's report is as good a signal as any) the Internet biggies are running a bit scared (the term "moral panic" comes to mind) as to what "madness" might come out of the WCIT meeting that the ITU is hosting in December in Dubai. [Milton L Mueller] As I have argued elsewhere, it is a bit of a panic, and one that has succeeded in stampeding a lot of public interest groups into it as well. [MG>] Yes, but likely something of some sort will happen or be made to attempt to happen at WCIT and it is useful to have some insight into what the various players might be thinking (although if one assumes the necessary irrationality of any position that doesn't start from a total and religious commitment to ubiquitous "free competitive markets") there probably isn't any point. And they are pulling out all the stops in trying to derail any real discussion on how the costs and benefits might be allocated of improving/extending Internet access in and into LDC's and within LDC's to the other 99% or so in those countries who currently have no possible means of access. This is of course because the ITU as the traditional venue for global telecom "governance" includes among its 195 or so Member States a very goodly proportion, probably a majority, who are currently experiencing net costs (including many regimes who see these costs in terms of lost political control) from Internet access and paticularly if attempts at extending access to rural and maginalized populations are taken into consideration, rather than net benefits and not surprisingly they are looking at ways of righting that balance. [Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can be soaked to "distribute" wealth to their favored businesses and political causes. This concern with "equitable distribution" inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who benefit from setting up the national toll booths. [MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's argument and we hear it often enough. What I would very much like to see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they don't publicly object I will, not all of those folks or dare I say even most (countering again some ideological and even should I say xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. [MG>] For some certainly, but I'm wondering who have been the net beneficiaries and whether those who haven't benefited directly have in fact borne some of the cost of those benefits. I don't know, maybe they have, maybe they haven't but neither Kende or you have offered much beyond ideology and bluster in that regard. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. [MG>] You are probably right but I would like a bit more evidence than your assertion and I would also like some analysis of the costs involved and also an analysis of how those costs (and benefits) have been and are being distributed and then an analysis of what might be required to ensure that there has been some benefits distributed beyond the usual cast of characters. I know that you and I have benefited but I'm rather less sure about the folks living in Khayalitcha and even less for the cattle herders in Burkina Faso and I mean now not in a never never land future. And as an outcome I'ld like to see an analysis which isn't zero sum (regulation or no regulation) as you seem to suggest is necessary. Rather the question shoud be what sort of regime (without regulation and or with what type of regulation of what elements of the overall Internet technical ecology). Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nashton at consensus.pro Fri Oct 12 03:01:26 2012 From: nashton at consensus.pro (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 07:01:26 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <0000013a53c7146c-90bff212-c6fd-44fb-b7ad-2e59b53115a0-000000@email.amazonses.com> Dear Milton, Every study ever written was paid for by someone. It is true that some paymasters attach more strings, and are looking for more specific outcomes, than others. Suggesting that all 'commissioned' studies are not 'real scholarly studies' seems like a pretty large generalisation based more on prejudice than anything else. I've read very biased commissioned studies, and very biased 'real' scholarly studies. I've read scholarly studies written by people who have no practical experience of the area they write of and as a consequence turn 1+1 into 5 (candidly, speaking generally, I find studies done purely by academics more likely to be divorced from the world at large than commissioned ones, but then, I may be displaying my own biases about the academic world, who knows? ;) On 11 Oct 2012, at 17:55, Milton L Mueller wrote: > [Milton L Mueller] moan. Yes, indeed. This is a commissioned study, by a consultancy that is in the business of serving the interests of its clients. The substance of the study is not terrible, it makes the standard case for the Internet model as we know it. But still, as someone who does real scholarly studies, I am always irritated by the fact that these kinds of paid-for pieces get 1,000 times more attention than an honest, objective scholarly study, and that even purportedly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Fri Oct 12 03:11:32 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 07:11:32 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>,<000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDE44D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Michael, brief in order to be quick (& viceversa): I think evidence is accumulating for a regime based on a combination of market/opening/deregulation and state intervention in developing countries, combinations that are specific to each country to a significant extent. Thus you see successful (metric to follow) state interventions in countries like Colombia in which a market supplies connectivity and higher-layer Internet services to a larga part of the population and the state comes in for the poorest or most disadvantaged, especially in the lower layers. Connectivity and access tend to be Layer 1-Layer 2 issues, need significant investments, and naturally allow few players. Internet-based benefits beyond pure connectivity accrue in many ways, are more anecdotal, and have not yet widely been assessed from an economic-theory point of view. Children and teenagers in schools are effective intermediaries for the more marginalized populations's access to the **benefits** of Internet access. They carry home back from schools in rural or urban-disadvantaged areas knowledge and action (from MP3 videos on portable devices for their illiterate grandmothers to explore themselves against breast cancer to actual red-tape before development banks.) In higher layers like intellectual property a combination of institutional, private, and small-scale/dispersed efforts are bringing access to knowledge to the masses. In Mexico opening up the sound archives (Fonoteca Nacional, with music, speech, radio programs, and even environmental sounds "intangible heritage") is one example of this. The struggle against ACTA and worse also plays a role here. This is far more active than trickle-down theory, as well as not waiting for an approach you can first neatly pigeon-hole theoretically. Another example of fast-changing paradigm which defies the neat structures you and Milton are discussing is in a new breed of IXPs which are now becoming attractive as seats for CDNs as well. So, state pushed or not, small IXPs begin at Layer 1/2 and suddenly attract content distribution, lowering entry barriers for users and producers of all kinds. Regulated? NOT, no, thank you!! Atop all this often state actors and large-telco reps continue to grab at straws and look to oracles while the Internet continues to dissolve the neatness of their paradigms, rents, and the axles of their revolving-door collusions. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: viernes, 12 de octubre de 2012 01:46 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Milton L Mueller' Asunto: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? Thanks Milton for your comments and few back to you as well… From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein I should say that both of these reports are very interesting and contain a wealth of good information, however, the problem that I have with them and particularly the second report is that it so clearly starts off with its policy conclusion and builds a case to support this. [Milton L Mueller] moan. Yes, indeed. This is a commissioned study, by a consultancy that is in the business of serving the interests of its clients. The substance of the study is not terrible, it makes the standard case for the Internet model as we know it. But still, as someone who does real scholarly studies, I am always irritated by the fact that these kinds of paid-for pieces get 1,000 times more attention than an honest, objective scholarly study, and that even purportedly critical scholars such as yourself seem to take them more seriously than real research simply because it’s easier to read and because it arrives on your virtual doorstep so easily and quickly via a publicity machine that generates “buzz” [MG>] Well yes, except that my intention was not "academic" or "scholarly" but rather to make a critical comment on a "politically" significant document--i.e. one that will likely (and certainly was intented to) be read by political/policy influentials who are very unlikely to come across a scholarly piece however well structured its methodology or execution. The point wasn't that it was bad "research" but rather it was ideology purporting to be research. >From what I am seeing (and Kende's report is as good a signal as any) the Internet biggies are running a bit scared (the term "moral panic" comes to mind) as to what "madness" might come out of the WCIT meeting that the ITU is hosting in December in Dubai. [Milton L Mueller] As I have argued elsewhere, it is a bit of a panic, and one that has succeeded in stampeding a lot of public interest groups into it as well. [MG>] Yes, but likely something of some sort will happen or be made to attempt to happen at WCIT and it is useful to have some insight into what the various players might be thinking (although if one assumes the necessary irrationality of any position that doesn't start from a total and religious commitment to ubiquitous "free competitive markets") there probably isn't any point… And they are pulling out all the stops in trying to derail any real discussion on how the costs and benefits might be allocated of improving/extending Internet access in and into LDC's and within LDC's to the other 99% or so in those countries who currently have no possible means of access. This is of course because the ITU as the traditional venue for global telecom "governance" includes among its 195 or so Member States a very goodly proportion, probably a majority, who are currently experiencing net costs (including many regimes who see these costs in terms of lost political control) from Internet access and paticularly if attempts at extending access to rural and maginalized populations are taken into consideration, rather than net benefits and not surprisingly they are looking at ways of righting that balance. [Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can be soaked to “distribute” wealth to their favored businesses and political causes. This concern with “equitable distribution” inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who benefit from setting up the national toll booths. [MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's argument and we hear it often enough. What I would very much like to see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they don't publicly object I will, not all of those folks or dare I say even most (countering again some ideological and even should I say xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. [MG>] For some certainly, but I'm wondering who have been the net beneficiaries and whether those who haven't benefited directly have in fact borne some of the cost of those benefits… I don't know, maybe they have, maybe they haven't but neither Kende or you have offered much beyond ideology and bluster in that regard. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. [MG>] You are probably right but I would like a bit more evidence than your assertion and I would also like some analysis of the costs involved and also an analysis of how those costs (and benefits) have been and are being distributed and then an analysis of what might be required to ensure that there has been some benefits distributed beyond the usual cast of characters. I know that you and I have benefited but I'm rather less sure about the folks living in Khayalitcha and even less for the cattle herders in Burkina Faso and I mean now not in a never never land future. And as an outcome I'ld like to see an analysis which isn't zero sum (regulation or no regulation) as you seem to suggest is necessary. Rather the question shoud be what sort of regime (without regulation and or with what type of regulation of what elements of the overall Internet technical ecology). Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int Fri Oct 12 03:10:35 2012 From: karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int (karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 09:10:35 +0200 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20121012091035.13522zlmse1dutm3@mail1.itu.ch> Colleagues, I mean there are many cases that can be used to illustrate the conflict of interest within ICANN and not the .Africa (to differentiate from .DotAfrica) If we refer to strings submited to this first round, we can note a demand for the string africa (applicant id 1-1243-89583) and another one dotafrica (1-1165-42560). I wonder why write these kinds of articles would hear in a conflict between two entities for africa string that does not exist. I agree that we must avoid conflicts of interest, but for the .Africa, this conflict should not exist. I’m sure people who have applied for the DotAfrica (as string) knew they had lost in advance the africa! http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/application-results/strings-1200utc-13jun12-en Karim, Comores Quoting Martin McOsieno : > Hi  > > Interesting story of the never ending ICANN > Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? > > > http://www.thedomains.com/2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-sends-third-letter-to-icann-alleging-conflict-of-interest-issues-with-its-board-members-over-africa/  > http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/  >   >  Martin -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Fri Oct 12 08:14:13 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 08:14:13 -0400 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: To be fair, the folks doing the alleging say they have written 3 letters to ICANN, but none of them appear in the correspondence section of the ICANN website, so we don't have any basis to judge IF there is a COI. It seems to me to be a desperate move to try to give themselves a basis upon which to appeal/litigate when they lose .africa (as they messed up and applied for .dotafrica instead). -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: > Hi > > Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This > time on .africa? > > http://www.thedomains.com/**2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-** > sends-third-letter-to-icann-**alleging-conflict-of-interest-** > issues-with-its-board-members-**over-africa/ > > http://domainingafrica.com/i-**will-win-africa-because-i-** > have-friends-in-high-places-**case-of-conflicted-board-**members/ > > > Martin > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Fri Oct 12 09:11:54 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 13:11:54 +0000 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>, Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> McTim, the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of the extortion screw", which works especially well if readers of the press don't apply critical skills in a timely manner. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de McTim [dogwallah at gmail.com] Enviado el: viernes, 12 de octubre de 2012 07:14 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Martin McOsieno Asunto: Re: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? To be fair, the folks doing the alleging say they have written 3 letters to ICANN, but none of them appear in the correspondence section of the ICANN website, so we don't have any basis to judge IF there is a COI. It seems to me to be a desperate move to try to give themselves a basis upon which to appeal/litigate when they lose .africa (as they messed up and applied for .dotafrica instead). -- Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Martin McOsieno > wrote: Hi Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? [X]http://www.thedomains.com/2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-sends-third-letter-to-icann-alleging-conflict-of-interest-issues-with-its-board-members-over-africa/ http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/ Martin ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From otsienomartin at yahoo.com Fri Oct 12 12:46:20 2012 From: otsienomartin at yahoo.com (Martin McOsieno) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 09:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1350060380.12782.YahooMailNeo@web164503.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Hi, I went to the DotConnectAfrica and in their correspondence to ICANN all letters are found here in this link : http://www.dotconnectafrica.org/icann-related-2/icann-outreach-and-participation/letters-to-icann/ . I have read the letters and i think IMHO there is conflict of interest at all levels. Thanks Martin. ________________________________ From: McTim To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Martin McOsieno Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 3:14 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? To be fair, the folks doing the alleging say they have written 3 letters to ICANN, but none of them appear in the correspondence section of the ICANN website, so we don't have any basis to judge IF there is a COI. It seems to me to be a desperate move to try to give themselves a basis upon which to appeal/litigate when they lose .africa (as they messed up and applied for .dotafrica instead). --  Cheers, McTim "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 1:02 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: Hi  > > >Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? > > >http://www.thedomains.com/2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-sends-third-letter-to-icann-alleging-conflict-of-interest-issues-with-its-board-members-over-africa/  >http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/   > Martin >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 12 12:47:17 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 23:47:17 +0700 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDE44D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>,<000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDE44D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <02c701cda899$3f79ec30$be6dc490$@gmail.com> Excellent Alejandro, that is the type of nuanced and non-ideological thinking/policy analysis that I think is necessary in the discussions leading up to the WCIT and beyond. And I completely agree that the particular mix will vary from country to country depending on a range of circumstances including existing infrastructure, economc/geographical constraints, socio-economic (political and other) imperatives and so on. The problem of course, comes in when folks insist on a market-good, state-bad blunderbuss (and ideolog based) approach. M From: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch [mailto:apisan at unam.mx] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 2:12 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein; 'Milton L Mueller' Subject: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? Michael, brief in order to be quick (& viceversa): I think evidence is accumulating for a regime based on a combination of market/opening/deregulation and state intervention in developing countries, combinations that are specific to each country to a significant extent. Thus you see successful (metric to follow) state interventions in countries like Colombia in which a market supplies connectivity and higher-layer Internet services to a larga part of the population and the state comes in for the poorest or most disadvantaged, especially in the lower layers. Connectivity and access tend to be Layer 1-Layer 2 issues, need significant investments, and naturally allow few players. Internet-based benefits beyond pure connectivity accrue in many ways, are more anecdotal, and have not yet widely been assessed from an economic-theory point of view. Children and teenagers in schools are effective intermediaries for the more marginalized populations's access to the **benefits** of Internet access. They carry home back from schools in rural or urban-disadvantaged areas knowledge and action (from MP3 videos on portable devices for their illiterate grandmothers to explore themselves against breast cancer to actual red-tape before development banks.) In higher layers like intellectual property a combination of institutional, private, and small-scale/dispersed efforts are bringing access to knowledge to the masses. In Mexico opening up the sound archives (Fonoteca Nacional, with music, speech, radio programs, and even environmental sounds "intangible heritage") is one example of this. The struggle against ACTA and worse also plays a role here. This is far more active than trickle-down theory, as well as not waiting for an approach you can first neatly pigeon-hole theoretically. Another example of fast-changing paradigm which defies the neat structures you and Milton are discussing is in a new breed of IXPs which are now becoming attractive as seats for CDNs as well. So, state pushed or not, small IXPs begin at Layer 1/2 and suddenly attract content distribution, lowering entry barriers for users and producers of all kinds. Regulated? NOT, no, thank you!! Atop all this often state actors and large-telco reps continue to grab at straws and look to oracles while the Internet continues to dissolve the neatness of their paradigms, rents, and the axles of their revolving-door collusions. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _____ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de michael gurstein [gurstein at gmail.com] Enviado el: viernes, 12 de octubre de 2012 01:46 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Milton L Mueller' Asunto: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? Thanks Milton for your comments and few back to you as well From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Milton L Mueller Sent: From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of michael gurstein I should say that both of these reports are very interesting and contain a wealth of good information, however, the problem that I have with them and particularly the second report is that it so clearly starts off with its policy conclusion and builds a case to support this. [Milton L Mueller] moan. Yes, indeed. This is a commissioned study, by a consultancy that is in the business of serving the interests of its clients. The substance of the study is not terrible, it makes the standard case for the Internet model as we know it. But still, as someone who does real scholarly studies, I am always irritated by the fact that these kinds of paid-for pieces get 1,000 times more attention than an honest, objective scholarly study, and that even purportedly critical scholars such as yourself seem to take them more seriously than real research simply because it’s easier to read and because it arrives on your virtual doorstep so easily and quickly via a publicity machine that generates “buzz” [MG>] Well yes, except that my intention was not "academic" or "scholarly" but rather to make a critical comment on a "politically" significant document--i.e. one that will likely (and certainly was intented to) be read by political/policy influentials who are very unlikely to come across a scholarly piece however well structured its methodology or execution. The point wasn't that it was bad "research" but rather it was ideology purporting to be research. >From what I am seeing (and Kende's report is as good a signal as any) the Internet biggies are running a bit scared (the term "moral panic" comes to mind) as to what "madness" might come out of the WCIT meeting that the ITU is hosting in December in Dubai. [Milton L Mueller] As I have argued elsewhere, it is a bit of a panic, and one that has succeeded in stampeding a lot of public interest groups into it as well. [MG>] Yes, but likely something of some sort will happen or be made to attempt to happen at WCIT and it is useful to have some insight into what the various players might be thinking (although if one assumes the necessary irrationality of any position that doesn't start from a total and religious commitment to ubiquitous "free competitive markets") there probably isn't any point And they are pulling out all the stops in trying to derail any real discussion on how the costs and benefits might be allocated of improving/extending Internet access in and into LDC's and within LDC's to the other 99% or so in those countries who currently have no possible means of access. This is of course because the ITU as the traditional venue for global telecom "governance" includes among its 195 or so Member States a very goodly proportion, probably a majority, who are currently experiencing net costs (including many regimes who see these costs in terms of lost political control) from Internet access and paticularly if attempts at extending access to rural and maginalized populations are taken into consideration, rather than net benefits and not surprisingly they are looking at ways of righting that balance. [Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can be soaked to “distribute” wealth to their favored businesses and political causes. This concern with “equitable distribution” inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who benefit from setting up the national toll booths. [MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's argument and we hear it often enough. What I would very much like to see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they don't publicly object I will, not all of those folks or dare I say even most (countering again some ideological and even should I say xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. [MG>] For some certainly, but I'm wondering who have been the net beneficiaries and whether those who haven't benefited directly have in fact borne some of the cost of those benefits I don't know, maybe they have, maybe they haven't but neither Kende or you have offered much beyond ideology and bluster in that regard. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. [MG>] You are probably right but I would like a bit more evidence than your assertion and I would also like some analysis of the costs involved and also an analysis of how those costs (and benefits) have been and are being distributed and then an analysis of what might be required to ensure that there has been some benefits distributed beyond the usual cast of characters. I know that you and I have benefited but I'm rather less sure about the folks living in Khayalitcha and even less for the cattle herders in Burkina Faso and I mean now not in a never never land future. And as an outcome I'ld like to see an analysis which isn't zero sum (regulation or no regulation) as you seem to suggest is necessary. Rather the question shoud be what sort of regime (without regulation and or with what type of regulation of what elements of the overall Internet technical ecology). Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr Fri Oct 12 13:04:25 2012 From: jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr (jlfullsack at wanadoo.fr) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 19:04:25 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <5077B19F.1040808@itforchange.net> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <5077B19F.1040808@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1626585411.27521.1350061465235.JavaMail.www@wwinf1d19> Many thanks to both Martin for his valuable information (BTW : who were our African fellows ? Already in Baku ?) and Parminder for its contextualization and -as usual- his complementary comments.   warm regards   Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 12/10/12 08:00 > De : "parminder" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? > > > > On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: > Hi  > Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? > > > But isnt the problem of conflict of interest structural to multistakeholder (MS) governance (not multistakeholder policy inputs, but actual governance) because MS governance is about those who have interest (or stake) being part of decision making processes. ICANN board and its various decision making committees, for instance, are full of people from the domain name industry, an industry that ICANN is supposed to regulate. Could one, coming from an old fashioned democratic tradition, even think of US's Federal Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory Authority of India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel respectively! No, certainly not, it would be unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's world of MSism . > > Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is window dressing, when the going, and the press, becomes too blatantly bad, as in the case of their former Chairman's misadventures. Otherwise, in the game as usual it is interested parties laying global CIR policies all the way, and the public or the supposed reps of the public sit in the gallery and clap enthusiastically about the untold wonders of MSism. > > This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say > “Icann must place commercial and financial interests in their appropriate context,” said Mr. Beckstrom, who is scheduled to step down from his post in July. “How can it do this if all top leadership is from the very domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate independently? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA > > See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest in ICANN at http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923 . > > Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the democratic system of governance in India, but I can assure you that if any governmental/policy organisation in India approached anywhere near the conflict of interest mess that ICANN is, it would take one public interest litigation to the high court or supreme court to get it folded up in a matter of days, even if the government itself does not fold it up (which too I am sure it would do on its own). > > parminder > > http://www.thedomains.com/2012/10/03/dotconnectafrica-sends-third-letter-to-icann-alleging-conflict-of-interest-issues-with-its-board-members-over-africa/  http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/     Martin > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Fri Oct 12 15:44:58 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 19:44:58 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EAF7@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Michael There is a vast literature on telecommunications liberalization and privatization's effects. If you have not seen evidence to back up the arguments about the effects, it is not because it doesn't exist. Here are some samples: The Impact of Privatization and Competition in the Telecommunications Sector Around the World http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=364140 Telecommunications Liberalization on Two Sides of the Atlantic http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9780815798781 The institutional environment and effects of telecommunication privatization and market liberalization in Asia http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596100000665 The productivity effects of the liberalization of Japanese telecommunication policy http://www.springerlink.com/content/r48142651763j8hv/ I include the abstract from this article, which summarizes the consensus of much of this research An Econometric Analysis of Telecom Competition, Privatization, and Regulation in Africa and Latin America. The Journal of Industrial Economics. Volume 49, Issue 1, pages 1-19, March 2001 This paper explores the effects of privatization, competition, and regulation on telecommunications performance in 30 African and Latin American countries from 1984 through 1997. Fixed-effects regressions reveal that competition is correlated with increases in the per capita number of mainlines, payphones, and connection capacity, and with decreases in the price of local calls. Privatization combined with an independent regulator is positively correlated with telecom performance measures. Privatization alone, however, is associated with few benefits, and is negatively correlated with connection capacity. [MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's argument and we hear it often enough. What I would very much like to see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they don't publicly object I will, not all of those folks or dare I say even most (countering again some ideological and even should I say xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. [MG>] For some certainly, but I'm wondering who have been the net beneficiaries and whether those who haven't benefited directly have in fact borne some of the cost of those benefits... I don't know, maybe they have, maybe they haven't but neither Kende or you have offered much beyond ideology and bluster in that regard. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. [MG>] You are probably right but I would like a bit more evidence than your assertion and I would also like some analysis of the costs involved and also an analysis of how those costs (and benefits) have been and are being distributed and then an analysis of what might be required to ensure that there has been some benefits distributed beyond the usual cast of characters. I know that you and I have benefited but I'm rather less sure about the folks living in Khayalitcha and even less for the cattle herders in Burkina Faso and I mean now not in a never never land future. And as an outcome I'ld like to see an analysis which isn't zero sum (regulation or no regulation) as you seem to suggest is necessary. Rather the question shoud be what sort of regime (without regulation and or with what type of regulation of what elements of the overall Internet technical ecology). Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Fri Oct 12 15:49:53 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2012 19:49:53 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <02c701cda899$3f79ec30$be6dc490$@gmail.com> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>,<000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDE44D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02c701cda899$3f79ec30$be6dc490$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EB27@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] The problem of course, comes in when folks insist on a market-good, state-bad blunderbuss (and ideolog based) approach. [Milton L Mueller] Good. Now I am sure you will feel the same way about, and react the same way to all those market-bad regulation-good ideologues...? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Fri Oct 12 20:05:05 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 00:05:05 +0000 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EB27@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>,<000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDE44D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02c701cda899$3f79ec30$be6dc490$@gmail.com>,<855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EB27@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDFA6D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Milton, it seems more likely that Michael Gurstein will continue to explore the issue in depth with an open mind. He has already stated so and a record to prove it. Onward to the issue now... Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: Milton L Mueller [mueller at syr.edu] Enviado el: viernes, 12 de octubre de 2012 14:49 Hasta: michael gurstein; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] The problem of course, comes in when folks insist on a market-good, state-bad blunderbuss (and ideolog based) approach. [Milton L Mueller] Good. Now I am sure you will feel the same way about, and react the same way to all those market-bad regulation-good ideologues…? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 12 22:06:39 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:06:39 +0600 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EAF7@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EAF7@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <046b01cda8e7$68226a10$38673e30$@gmail.com> Thanks Milton, I have some limited knowledge of that literature. The problem is, as per the abstract you quoted, in the real world the issue isn't just with "the effects of privatization, competition, and regulation on telecommunications performance (my emphasis)" where I have no doubt their (and your) conclusions/assumptions would be borne out. Rather it is with the somewhat more complex world of how to achieve non-telecommunications benefits among those for example who are really very far away from the closest exchange or cell tower and whether achieving the benefits that you (and they) are pointing to, are, in the broad scope of requirements for national policies for development (and in some cases even for survival) worth the costs in terms of foregone revenues and means for a variety of policy and other governmental intervention. Honestly, I don't know the answer but simply quoting studies of the impacts/benefits of privatization without a parallel examination of the broader socio-political and economic costs doesn't I'm afraid, take us very far. Best, M From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 1:45 AM To: michael gurstein; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? Michael There is a vast literature on telecommunications liberalization and privatization's effects. If you have not seen evidence to back up the arguments about the effects, it is not because it doesn't exist. Here are some samples: The Impact of Privatization and Competition in the Telecommunications Sector Around the World http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=364140 Telecommunications Liberalization on Two Sides of the Atlantic http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9780815798781 The institutional environment and effects of telecommunication privatization and market liberalization in Asia http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308596100000665 The productivity effects of the liberalization of Japanese telecommunication policy http://www.springerlink.com/content/r48142651763j8hv/ I include the abstract from this article, which summarizes the consensus of much of this research An Econometric Analysis of Telecom Competition, Privatization, and Regulation in Africa and Latin America. The Journal of Industrial Economics. Volume 49, Issue 1, pages 1-19, March 2001 This paper explores the effects of privatization, competition, and regulation on telecommunications performance in 30 African and Latin American countries from 1984 through 1997. Fixed-effects regressions reveal that competition is correlated with increases in the per capita number of mainlines, payphones, and connection capacity, and with decreases in the price of local calls. Privatization combined with an independent regulator is positively correlated with telecom performance measures. Privatization alone, however, is associated with few benefits, and is negatively correlated with connection capacity. [MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's argument and we hear it often enough. What I would very much like to see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they don't publicly object I will, not all of those folks or dare I say even most (countering again some ideological and even should I say xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and information (including through undermining various repressive political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to those with the most. [Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation. [MG>] For some certainly, but I'm wondering who have been the net beneficiaries and whether those who haven't benefited directly have in fact borne some of the cost of those benefits. I don't know, maybe they have, maybe they haven't but neither Kende or you have offered much beyond ideology and bluster in that regard. The internet never would have happened without it. I know it provides cognitive dissonance for some people, but all you have to do is compare the penetration and price of ICTs before and after liberalization and the contrast will be very, very stark. True, there have been pitfalls here and there, usually due to remnants of monopoly power or not handling the complex transition from monopoly to competition properly, but on the whole the progress has been revolutionary. [MG>] You are probably right but I would like a bit more evidence than your assertion and I would also like some analysis of the costs involved and also an analysis of how those costs (and benefits) have been and are being distributed and then an analysis of what might be required to ensure that there has been some benefits distributed beyond the usual cast of characters. I know that you and I have benefited but I'm rather less sure about the folks living in Khayalitcha and even less for the cattle herders in Burkina Faso and I mean now not in a never never land future. And as an outcome I'ld like to see an analysis which isn't zero sum (regulation or no regulation) as you seem to suggest is necessary. Rather the question shoud be what sort of regime (without regulation and or with what type of regulation of what elements of the overall Internet technical ecology). Mike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 12 22:06:39 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 08:06:39 +0600 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EB27@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu>,<000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDE44D@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <02c701cda899$3f79ec30$be6dc490$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224EB27@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <047001cda8e7$6a088f30$3e19ad90$@gmail.com> When I see some I'm sure I will :) (In the real world where most of us live our lives there are no simple -- one size fits all -- answers. That doesn't mean that we don't have goals or values but it does mean that we don't mistake means for ends and look to impose things that might work for some in some places and under some circumstances as a sledgehammer for all in all places at all times.. M From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu] Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2012 1:50 AM To: michael gurstein; 'Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch'; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: RE: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com] The problem of course, comes in when folks insist on a market-good, state-bad blunderbuss (and ideolog based) approach. [Milton L Mueller] Good. Now I am sure you will feel the same way about, and react the same way to all those market-bad regulation-good ideologues.? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Fri Oct 12 23:01:00 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 12:01:00 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Closing of online registration In-Reply-To: <66AA689F-5BFA-439F-A039-0F8DF7410050@unog.ch> References: <66AA689F-5BFA-439F-A039-0F8DF7410050@unog.ch> Message-ID: Dear list, Online registration for the Bakul IGF Meeting closes on Monday, 15 October. This is important for the Visa process. You need to obtain host country invitation letter and the online registration confirmation email from IGF secretariat is the first step to obtain the letter. I am not sure how you go through the visa application with onsite registration which will start on Friday, 2 November at the Baku Expo Center. In any case, it is much better to register and apply now. best, izumi -------------- 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 From fahd.batayneh at gmail.com Sat Oct 13 04:02:55 2012 From: fahd.batayneh at gmail.com (Fahd A. Batayneh) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 11:02:55 +0300 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:14 PM, McTim wrote: > To be fair, the folks doing the alleging say they have written 3 letters > to ICANN, but none of them appear in the correspondence section of the > ICANN website, so we don't have any basis to judge IF there is a COI. Not all correspondents sent to ICANN are published on the ICANN website under the correspondents web-page. In fact, there have been discussion on the reasons behind that especially during the days of ICANN's previous CEO. One of the folks who gives ICANN tough times on this matter is Kieren McCarthy from dot-nxt, and that is apparent from some of his articles. Fahd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Oct 13 03:52:28 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 10:52:28 +0300 Subject: [governance] The ITU/WCIT: Thinking About Internet Regulatory Policy From An LDC Perspective? In-Reply-To: <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> References: <056001cda79c$6fcd1360$4f673a20$@gmail.com> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224D926@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <000401cda845$99a883a0$ccf98ae0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <50791DBC.8080409@gmail.com> One way out of the impasse is to look at the treatment of these issues differently than the traditional neoclassical economics sense... Oligopoly has its privileges and costs - but are tolerated particularly in enterprises with high fixed costs and the need to maintain/enhance capabilities/innovation. Lower prices to consumers is the classical spread of benefits... there is also the German Historical School economics that focusses on the ability of entrepreneurial firms pushing up both wages and profits - the collusive spread - that has other synergistic effects. In other instances, would access be facilitated even more by sharing of infrastructure for network coverage (forms of cooperation not evident in many countries where there is capital shortage (or high cost) as UNCTAD previously indicated? I.e. is the liberalisation competitive model the most efficient in its own terms, or can it be improved by policy (i.e. no policy policy vs a policy)? I mean haracter for character SMS seems to be the highest cost telecoms (even in some cases when compared to satelite comms)... On 2012/10/12 09:46 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > > */[Milton L Mueller] The problem with your perspective, Michael, is > that it does indeed represent the classic telecom monopoly perspective > which is often held by the governmental Ministries and national > telecom monopolies in LDCs. Basically they see international traffic > not as an industry that supplies goods and services that benefit the > consumers who pay for them, but as a source of monopoly rents that can > be soaked to “distribute” wealth to their favored businesses and > political causes. This concern with “equitable distribution” > inevitably ends up both being massively inefficient and thus stifling > growth, while not even achieving equity either, because it will always > be a few privileged, well-connected businesses and politicians who > benefit from setting up the national toll booths. /* > > *//* > > */[MG>] I know that is your position Milton, which at that level of > ideological pandering/name calling is no different from Kende's > argument and we hear it often enough. What I would very much like to > see though, is some evidence to back it up. What I'm curious to see, > and that was the point of my original note, is some research/analysis > which starts not from a definition of "benefits" as dictated by > Google, Microsoft, and Uncle Tom digerati and all but rather one which > starts from the quite specific policy contexts and dilemmas of the > folks in LDC's who seem to be bearing a rather large amount of short > term cost in the service of purported long term benefit (and not > incidentally alongside rather significant short term benefits adhering > to already extremely well provided for DC beneficiaries). And if they > don't publicly object I will, not all of those folks or dare I say > even most (countering again some ideological and even should I say > xenophobic posturing rather than systematic analysis and research on > your part) are as you imply, corrupt and despotic. /* > > *//* > > *//* > > I myself am of two minds on this issue. I well recognize the > value/benefits that could flow from Internet access even to the > poorest of the poor and the overwhelming benefits that Internet access > provides to those for example in civil society who can take advantage > of its more or less unlimited free flow of communications and > information (including through undermining various repressive > political regimes). On the other hand, the unlimited unregulated > policy environment advocated by reports like that of Kende and others > of that ideological ilk would I think, lead almost directly to a > further enrichment of the already stupendously wealthy and overall a > signifcant transfer of wealth and benefit from those with the least to > those with the most. > > */[Milton L Mueller] I am glad you are honest about this > two-mindedness. Factually, there is just no way around it. The > liberalization and deregulation of telecommunications has massively > increased access, decreased costs, increased diversity and innovation./* > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Oct 13 03:53:46 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 10:53:46 +0300 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> On 2012/10/12 04:11 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of > the extortion screw", Whatever does this mean? -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Sat Oct 13 04:56:44 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Sat, 13 Oct 2012 14:26:44 +0530 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> Message-ID: Like if you're trying to bribe your way out of some confusing government work in India, the agent goes "we'll bill you 2-3 grand for the work - is that OK?" and then just before the work is done demands 5K saying "but we already told you it would cost extra!" - and if you don't pay the work is returned half-finished or even worse than before. For all the 'corruption doesnt pay' you hear nowadays people do this on a surprisingly regular basis. -C On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > On 2012/10/12 04:11 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > >> the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of the >> extortion screw", >> > > > Whatever does this mean? > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sat Oct 13 22:59:13 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 04:59:13 +0200 Subject: [governance] Budapest References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> FYI http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_london_process_budapest_another_travel_circus_internet_community/ w -------------- 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 From kovenronald at aol.com Sun Oct 14 05:13:29 2012 From: kovenronald at aol.com (Koven Ronald) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 05:13:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [governance] Budapest In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <8CF78034F876D03-2358-404AE@webmail-m169.sysops.aol.com> Thank you, Wolfgang. That was very interesting and useful. Bests, Rony -----E-mail d'origine----- De : "Kleinwächter, Wolf gang" A: governance Envoyé le : Di, 14 Oct 2012 5:07 Sujet : [governance] Budapest FYI http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_london_process_budapest_another_travel_circus_internet_community/ w ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Sun Oct 14 05:17:28 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 11:17:28 +0200 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <5077B19F.1040808@itforchange.net> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <5077B19F.1040808@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi, ICANN is both a regulator and a vendor of services based on its regulations. This is just the same as a private standard body taking patents on its own standards and collecting license fees. Rhetoric of equitable, neutral, accountable, transparent, multi-stakeholder, public interest, bottom up (or down), belongs to outreach (aka propaganda). We know the reality, and we know it cannot change. The reason it cannot change is that ICANN's structure is by design a locus of permanent conflicts of interests. A self proclaimed world monopoly, without voting members, nor international statute, collecting hundreds millions $, without paying taxes anywhere, is already liable to suspicion. Are the costs justified by provided services, or are services the by-product of a racket ? Humans not being angels, it would be very naive to believe that ICANN's decision makers would stricly ignore their own personal and future interests. And this is to last as long as regulation and services provision keep hiding behind the smoke screen of a single organization. Another flame (not from Kieren McCarthy). http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_the_draw_icann_severe_case_of_virus_infection/ Louis - - - On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: > > Hi > > Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This > time on .africa? > > But isnt the problem of conflict of interest structural to > multistakeholder (MS) governance (not multistakeholder policy inputs, but > actual governance) because MS governance is about those who have interest > (or stake) being part of decision making processes. ICANN board and its > various decision making committees, for instance, are full of people from > the domain name industry, an industry that ICANN is supposed to regulate. > Could one, coming from an old fashioned democratic tradition, even think of > US's Federal Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory Authority of > India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel respectively! No, certainly not, > it would be unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's world of MSism. > > Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is window dressing, > when the going, and the press, becomes too blatantly bad, as in the case of > their former Chairman's misadventures. Otherwise, in the game as usual it > is interested parties laying global CIR policies all the way, and the > public or the supposed reps of the public sit in the gallery and clap > enthusiastically about the untold wonders of MSism. > > This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say > > “Icann must place commercial and financial interests in their appropriate > context,” said Mr. Beckstrom, who is scheduled to step down from his post > in July. “How can it do this if all top leadership is from the very > domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate independently? > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA > > See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest in ICANN at > http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923. > > Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the democratic > system of governance in India, but I can assure you that if any > governmental/policy organisation in India approached anywhere near the > conflict of interest mess that ICANN is, it would take one public interest > litigation to the high court or supreme court to get it folded up in a > matter of days, even if the government itself does not fold it up (which > too I am sure it would do on its own). > > parminder > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Sun Oct 14 07:10:40 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 08:10:40 -0300 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? Message-ID: Dear Louis, The Werner Staub article on CircleId you quote, showing Icann's virotic propensity for games and lottery, is fascinating. If this is so (and Werner is very convincing), why should Icann receive the application fee in advance? frt rgds --c.a. Sent from Samsung tablet"Louis Pouzin (well)" escreveu:Hi, ICANN is both a regulator and a vendor of services based on its regulations. This is just the same as a private standard body taking patents on its own standards and collecting license fees. Rhetoric of equitable, neutral, accountable, transparent, multi-stakeholder, public interest, bottom up (or down), belongs to outreach (aka propaganda). We know the reality, and we know it cannot change. The reason it cannot change is that ICANN's structure is by design a locus of permanent conflicts of interests. A self proclaimed world monopoly, without voting members, nor international statute, collecting hundreds millions $, without paying taxes anywhere, is already liable to suspicion. Are the costs justified by provided services, or are services the by-product of a racket ? Humans not being angels, it would be very naive to believe that ICANN's decision makers would stricly ignore their own personal and future interests. And this is to last as long as regulation and services provision keep hiding behind the smoke screen of a single organization. Another flame (not from Kieren McCarthy). http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_the_draw_icann_severe_case_of_virus_infection/ Louis - - - On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM, parminder wrote: On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: Hi  Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? But isnt the problem of conflict of interest structural to multistakeholder (MS) governance (not multistakeholder policy inputs, but actual governance) because MS governance is about those who have interest (or stake) being part of decision making processes. ICANN board and its various decision making committees, for instance, are full of people from the domain name industry, an industry that ICANN is supposed to regulate. Could one, coming from an old fashioned democratic tradition, even think of US's Federal Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory Authority of India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel respectively! No, certainly not, it would be unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's world of MSism. Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is window dressing, when the going, and the press, becomes too blatantly bad, as in the case of their former Chairman's misadventures. Otherwise, in the game as usual it is interested parties laying global CIR policies all the way, and the public or the supposed reps of the public sit in the gallery and clap enthusiastically about the untold wonders of MSism. This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say “Icann must place commercial and financial interests in their appropriate context,” said Mr. Beckstrom, who is scheduled to step down from his post in July. “How can it do this if all top leadership is from the very domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate independently? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest in ICANN at http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923 . Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the democratic system of governance in India, but I can assure you that if any governmental/policy organisation in India approached anywhere near the conflict of interest mess that ICANN is, it would take one public interest litigation to the high court or supreme court to get it folded up in a matter of days, even if the government itself does not fold it up (which too I am sure it would do on its own). parminder   -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Sun Oct 14 07:49:14 2012 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 18:49:14 +0700 Subject: [governance] Budapest In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <507AA6BA.1020808@gmx.net> More on Budapest: I have excerpted and *highlighted* some points. Norbert Klein =* * *Some Takeaways From The Budapest Conference On Cyberspace – Analysis* October 13, 2012, by Cherian Samuel In terms of various agendas, the *European countries* highlighted the human rights aspects of cybersecurity, *based on their characterization of internet freedom* as a fundamental right, leading *the Chinese representative to acerbically ask whether he was at a human rights conference or a cybersecurity conference*... The *sovereignty issue* also came to the fore in the discussions on cybercrime where the *Russians* stoutly resisted a push to get more countries to sign on to the Budapest Convention on Cybercrime. They described it as both outdated and ineffective and *wanted it to be debated in the United Nations*... If the *third set of actors*, the various private sector representatives gathered at the venue, had a message to put out, it was that there was no need for governments to get involved in cybersecurity since *practical issues had to be addressed in cyber time, not “political consultation time*.” ... *India’s contribution* to the deliberations was in the form of a keynote address by Sachin Pilot, the Minister of State for Telecommunications, where he called for internet governance to be made more equitable and effective. India’s approach to the internet has been tech-centric and free of ideological overlays, although that approach seems to have run its course. There are concerns that simply trusting in private companies to deliver on cybersecurity without adequate safeguards or assurances don’t pass muster... The other notable initiative coming out of Budapest was the announcement by the *the UK government of plans to create a Center for Global Cyber-Security Capacity Building* with an investment of 2 million pounds. Practical initiatives of this type that emphasize upon collaboration, skills sharing and capacity building would go a long way towards improving global cybersecurity. However, not only are such governmental initiatives too few and far between, the *climate of distrust that has begun to pervade cybersecurity means* that they will be viewed with suspicion and might not find many takers... *Source:* http://www.eurasiareview.com/13102012-some-takeaways-from-the-budapest-conference-on-cyberspace-analysis/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eurasiareview%2FVsnE+%28Eurasia+Review%29 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Sun Oct 14 07:57:18 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 13:57:18 +0200 Subject: [governance] Cyberwar References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD467@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118187 FYI w -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Sun Oct 14 10:47:17 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 16:47:17 +0200 Subject: [governance] Cyberwar In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD467@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD467@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: FUD propaganda, and an agenda of what the US is prepared to do to other countries. He also reminds us that D O D is now in charge of national security, not D H S. That spells increasingly worse for internet freedom. Louis - - - On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 1:57 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" < wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote: > > http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118187 > > FYI > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dl at panamo.eu Sun Oct 14 15:19:53 2012 From: dl at panamo.eu (Dominique Lacroix) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 21:19:53 +0200 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <5077B19F.1040808@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <507B1059.3040308@panamo.eu> "/Corn cannot expect justice from a court of chickens./" ;-) @+, best, Dom Le 14/10/12 11:17, Louis Pouzin (well) a écrit : > Hi, > > ICANN is both a regulator and a vendor of services based on its > regulations. This is just the same as a private standard body taking > patents on its own standards and collecting license fees. > > Rhetoric of equitable, neutral, accountable, transparent, > multi-stakeholder, public interest, bottom up (or down), belongs to > outreach (aka propaganda). We know the reality, and we know it cannot > change. > > The reason it cannot change is that ICANN's structure is by design a > locus of permanent conflicts of interests. A self proclaimed world > monopoly, without voting members, nor international statute, > collecting hundreds millions $, without paying taxes anywhere, is > already liable to suspicion. Are the costs justified by provided > services, or are services the by-product of a racket ? > > Humans not being angels, it would be very naive to believe that > ICANN's decision makers would stricly ignore their own personal and > future interests. And this is to last as long as regulation and > services provision keep hiding behind the smoke screen of a single > organization. > > Another flame (not from Kieren McCarthy). > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_the_draw_icann_severe_case_of_virus_infection/ > > Louis > - - - > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM, parminder > wrote: > > > On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: >> Hi >> >> Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. >> This time on .africa? > But isnt the problem of conflict of interest structural to > multistakeholder (MS) governance (not multistakeholder policy > inputs, but actual governance) because MS governance is about > those who have interest (or stake) being part of decision making > processes. ICANN board and its various decision making committees, > for instance, are full of people from the domain name industry, an > industry that ICANN is supposed to regulate. Could one, coming > from an old fashioned democratic tradition, even think of US's > Federal Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory Authority > of India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel respectively! No, > certainly not, it would be unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's > world of MSism. > > Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is window > dressing, when the going, and the press, becomes too blatantly > bad, as in the case of their former Chairman's misadventures. > Otherwise, in the game as usual it is interested parties laying > global CIR policies all the way, and the public or the supposed > reps of the public sit in the gallery and clap enthusiastically > about the untold wonders of MSism. > > This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say > > “Icann must place commercial and financial interests in their > appropriate context,” said Mr. Beckstrom, who is scheduled to > step down from his post in July. “How can it do this if all > top leadership is from the very domain-name industry it is > supposed to coordinate independently? > > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA > > > See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest in ICANN > at > http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923 > . > > Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the > democratic system of governance in India, but I can assure you > that if any governmental/policy organisation in India approached > anywhere near the conflict of interest mess that ICANN is, it > would take one public interest litigation to the high court or > supreme court to get it folded up in a matter of days, even if the > government itself does not fold it up (which too I am sure it > would do on its own). > > parminder > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From marie.georges at noos.fr Sun Oct 14 17:14:54 2012 From: marie.georges at noos.fr (Marie GEORGES) Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 23:14:54 +0200 Subject: [governance] Cyberwar In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD467@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <1350018151.93184.YahooMailNeo@web164506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EDF600@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50791E0A.7020007@gmail.com> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD466@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD467@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Many thanks for all these information, included on the Conference in Budapest MG Le 14 oct. 2012 à 13:57, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang a écrit : > > http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118187 > > FYI > > > w > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Oct 14 20:21:34 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 06:21:34 +0600 Subject: [governance] name.space sues ICANN over 189 TLDs Message-ID: <03e101cdaa6b$0a914e90$1fb3ebb0$@gmail.com> -----Original Message----- From: nettime-l-bounces at mail.kein.org [mailto:nettime-l-bounces at mail.kein.org] On Behalf Of nettime's_roving_reporter Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 5:32 AM To: nettime-l at kein.org Subject: [SPAM] name.space sues ICANN over 189 TLDs http://domainincite.com/10754-company-files-for-injunction-against-189-new-g tlds Company files for injunction against 189 new gTLDs Kevin Murphy, October 12, 2012, 21:48:52 (UTC), in Registries Alternate root player Name.Space has sued ICANN for trademark infringement and anti-competitive behavior, saying "insiders" have conspired to keep it out of the new gTLD program. If successful, the suit would prevent dozens of new gTLD applicants from having their applications approved. The lawsuit, filed in California this week, follows a warning the company fired at ICANN this March. While only ICANN is named as a defendant, the suit alleges that the new gTLD program was crafted by and is dominated by "ICANN insiders" and "industry titans". It wants an injunction preventing ICANN delegating any of the 189 gTLD strings that it claims it has rights to. It also fingers several current and former ICANN directors, including current and former chairs Steve Crocker and Peter Dengate Thrush, over their alleged conflicts of interest. Name.Space has been operating 482 diverse TLDs -- such as .news, .sucks, and .mail -- in a lightly used alternate root system since 1996. Most people can't access these zones and are unaware that they exist. The company applied to have 118 of these strings added to the root in ICANN's "proof of concept" gTLD expansion in 2000, when the application fee was $50,000, but was unsuccessful. Now, the company claims the new gTLD program is "an attack on name.space's business model and a mean by which to create and maintain market power in the TLD markets". The complaint (pdf) states: Rather than adopting a procedure to account for the pending 2000 Application and facilitate the expansion of TLD providers in the DNS, ICANN has adopted a procedure so complex and expensive that it once again effectively prohibited newcomers from competing. It instead has permitted participation solely by ICANN insiders and industry titans. If it had applied for all 118 again in this year's round, it would have cost almost $22 million (though it would have qualified for an $83,000 discount on a single bid). Name.Space is asking for damages and an injunction preventing ICANN from approving 189 gTLDs that match those it currently operates in its alternate root. The full list of affected applications is attached to the complaint. (c) 2010-2012 TLD Research Ltd # distributed via : no commercial use without permission # is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime at kein.org !DSPAM:2676,507b219e25485760221330! -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Mon Oct 15 02:08:28 2012 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 09:08:28 +0300 Subject: [governance] Emerging Cyber-Security Threats and Implications for the Private Sector Message-ID: Hi all, Interesting article on seminar subject : http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_emerging_cybersecurity_threats_and_implications_for_private_sector/ Thanks, Gideon Rop -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Mon Oct 15 03:50:56 2012 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 03:50:56 -0400 Subject: [governance] Verify that you got a visa list email (Baku) In-Reply-To: <20121011125212.GO5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> References: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20121011124947.GN5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> <20121011125212.GO5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> Message-ID: Hi, After inquiring about this list with the very responsive staff and nice people at Visa Inquiries for Baku's IGF, here is the answer I have received. "Please kindly note that the document attached is not the final document from Migration Service. Note that every IGP participant will receive individual paper from Migration Service. I'll send them as soon as I get. No concerns on that." So, patience... Mawaki On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Tapani Tarvainen wrote: > Oops, that obviously was meant for Nnenna only. > > But I guess it goes to show how easily things sometimes spread wider > than they should - I just realized that list is what Bill must've > meant about distributing participants' passport numbers. > > Nnenna, > > I don't really need the list but I'd like to know if I'm in it. > > Tapani > > On Oct 11 15:49, Tapani Tarvainen (tapani.tarvainen at effi.org) wrote: > >> On Oct 09 05:35, Nnenna (nne75 at yahoo.com) wrote: >> >> > Dear all >> > >> > Few hours ago I received another email from Baku concerning entry >> > visa. This is the mail that airline companies will require before >> > boarding you. It has a list 200+ names >> >> > If you think you should have received one and did not see it, or you >> > need the list, send a line to nnenna at nnenna.org and I will forward it >> >> Dear NNenna, >> >> Could you please forward it to me. Thank you. >> >> - I Hope to see you in Baku. In case you don't remember me, I'm the >> guy behind camera in this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSU346fkkSQ >> >> Best regards, >> >> -- >> Tapani Tarvainen >> Vice president, Electronic Frontier Finland >> email tapani.tarvainen at effi.org >> tel. +358-40-7293479 >> >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Oct 15 07:14:59 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 23:14:59 +1200 Subject: [governance] #Inspirational Speech by Fadi Chehadi @NCUC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, Inspirational speech by ICANN CEO at NCUC Fadi Chehadi, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apTsW7qlFQM&feature=youtu.be Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Mon Oct 15 07:19:38 2012 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:19:38 +0300 Subject: [governance] #Inspirational Speech by Fadi Chehadi @NCUC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Sala, Gideon Rop, DotConnectAfrica On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > Inspirational speech by ICANN CEO at NCUC Fadi Chehadi, see: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apTsW7qlFQM&feature=youtu.be > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Mon Oct 15 07:23:15 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:23:15 +0300 Subject: [governance] Re: Verisign's Patent Application for the Transfer of DNSSEC Domains In-Reply-To: References: <50752993.3040204@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <507BF223.8000607@gmail.com> Sala Nice article this. Essential technologies or those in the "public interest" ought to be accessible. However, the rentiers in the US prevented South Africa from providing HIV medication using public health patent exceptions... the case was BigPharma vs Mandela and others... if that was the case for very obvious deaths what chance "obscure" internet technologies...? And for arguments sake, would not letting the US CIR companies patent everything they can actually reduce the viability of the US as a CIR hub (i.e. patent exclusions in other jurisdictions could become more accommodating especially since Verisign has to disclose its info in the patent application)? And with shoddy patenting standards one can expect a right royal mess in a context of a litigious country... Riaz On 2012/10/11 11:10 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > Dear All, > > Here's my perspective: > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121011_perspective_on_verisign_patent_application_on_domain_transfers/ > > > Kind Regards, > Sala -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Mon Oct 15 07:35:13 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:35:13 +0200 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Carlos, As you know ICANN has been constantly extending delays and postponing deadlines in the new extensions process. Unless you believe in miracles this is not going to stop right away. A corporation candidate for a string has already committed resources, internal staff, consultants, lawyers, partnership for sharing the string with other organizations, etc. When the ICANN process is longer than anticipated, or even unpredictable, it's a drain on the corporate budget. Make a bet, $50k monthly or more. It's also a loss of credibility and a risk of being shoved aside for the executives who decided to join the new extensions craze. Then what ? Like in the stock market. When prospects are bad enough, take your loss before losing more. AFAIK several (6) candidates have already withdrawn. ICANN refunds $55k, the loss is $130k per string, plus a sizable fraction of resources already committed. It's a better deal than one year delay, isn't. No wonder ICANN did collect money up front. They expected to lock their pigeons in a safe cage. Btw, as far as I remember, in its early days ICANN toyed with some sort of auction or lottery for domain names. Apparently the idea was shelved, because illegal in California. Enjoy the day. Louis - - - On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > Dear Louis, > > The Werner Staub article on CircleId you quote, showing Icann's virotic > propensity for games and lottery, is fascinating. If this is so (and Werner > is very convincing), why should Icann receive the application fee in > advance? > > frt rgds > > --c.a. > > > > > Sent from Samsung tablet > > "Louis Pouzin (well)" escreveu: > > Hi, > > ICANN is both a regulator and a vendor of services based on its > regulations. This is just the same as a private standard body taking > patents on its own standards and collecting license fees. > > Rhetoric of equitable, neutral, accountable, transparent, > multi-stakeholder, public interest, bottom up (or down), belongs to > outreach (aka propaganda). We know the reality, and we know it cannot > change. > > The reason it cannot change is that ICANN's structure is by design a locus > of permanent conflicts of interests. A self proclaimed world monopoly, > without voting members, nor international statute, collecting hundreds > millions $, without paying taxes anywhere, is already liable to suspicion. > Are the costs justified by provided services, or are services the > by-product of a racket ? > > Humans not being angels, it would be very naive to believe that ICANN's > decision makers would stricly ignore their own personal and future > interests. And this is to last as long as regulation and services provision > keep hiding behind the smoke screen of a single organization. > > Another flame (not from Kieren McCarthy). > > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121013_the_draw_icann_severe_case_of_virus_infection/ > > Louis > - - - > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 7:58 AM, parminder wrote: > >> >> On Friday 12 October 2012 10:32 AM, Martin McOsieno wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This >> time on .africa? >> >> But isnt the problem of conflict of interest structural to >> multistakeholder (MS) governance (not multistakeholder policy inputs, but >> actual governance) because MS governance is about those who have interest >> (or stake) being part of decision making processes. ICANN board and its >> various decision making committees, for instance, are full of people from >> the domain name industry, an industry that ICANN is supposed to regulate. >> Could one, coming from an old fashioned democratic tradition, even think of >> US's Federal Communications Commission or Telecom Regulatory Authority of >> India having a rep from Verizon or Airtel respectively! No, certainly not, >> it would be unthinkable. But not so in the ICANN's world of MSism. >> >> Consequently most conflict of interest talk at ICANN is window dressing, >> when the going, and the press, becomes too blatantly bad, as in the case of >> their former Chairman's misadventures. Otherwise, in the game as usual it >> is interested parties laying global CIR policies all the way, and the >> public or the supposed reps of the public sit in the gallery and clap >> enthusiastically about the untold wonders of MSism. >> >> This is what the outgoing CEO of ICANN had to say >> >> “Icann must place commercial and financial interests in their appropriate >> context,” said Mr. Beckstrom, who is scheduled to step down from his post >> in July. “How can it do this if all top leadership is from the very >> domain-name industry it is supposed to coordinate independently? >> >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-naming-firm-goes-public.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1332165645-IV28j+gNERC8I8kD5rURmA >> >> See some examples of an endemic of conflicts of interest in ICANN at >> http://www.internetevolution.com/author.asp?section_id=1072&doc_id=240923. >> >> Many of you may not have great positive thoughts about the democratic >> system of governance in India, but I can assure you that if any >> governmental/policy organisation in India approached anywhere near the >> conflict of interest mess that ICANN is, it would take one public interest >> litigation to the high court or supreme court to get it folded up in a >> matter of days, even if the government itself does not fold it up (which >> too I am sure it would do on its own). >> >> parminder >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int Mon Oct 15 07:46:15 2012 From: karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int (karim.attoumanimohamed at ties.itu.int) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 13:46:15 +0200 Subject: [governance] #Inspirational Speech by Fadi Chehadi @NCUC In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20121015134615.87531vazdd6y97d3@mail1.itu.ch> Thx Sala Quoting "Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro" : > Dear All, > > Inspirational speech by ICANN CEO at NCUC Fadi Chehadi, see: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apTsW7qlFQM&feature=youtu.be > > Kind Regards, > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Oct 15 11:50:36 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 11:50:36 -0400 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <541CAA18-BE92-4BFC-B874-63045A894E0A@virtualized.org> Louis, On Oct 15, 2012, at 7:35 AM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: > As you know ICANN has been constantly extending delays and postponing deadlines in the new extensions process. I personally think delaying the process instead of moving forward when there is guaranteed breakage. > No wonder ICANN did collect money up front. They expected to lock their pigeons in a safe cage. Or, there are upfront costs that ICANN might need to recover. > Btw, as far as I remember, in its early days ICANN toyed with some sort of auction or lottery for domain names. Apparently the idea was shelved, because illegal in California. I thought the main reason against doing auctions was that it would severely disadvantage folks without a potentially unbounded money supply. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From caribe at entropia.blog.br Mon Oct 15 14:07:50 2012 From: caribe at entropia.blog.br (Joao Carlos Caribe) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 15:07:50 -0300 Subject: [governance] Bad signs ? IGF inside Bakutel ? Message-ID: <7D22FD4B-255D-4D9A-97C7-300480A6D70D@entropia.blog.br> I'm just checking the IGF 2012 meeting venue at Baku Expo Exhibition and Convention Center and checking the Expo Center schedule I found on the date of IGF other event called "Bakutel" http://www.bakuexpocenter.az/en/exhibitions.php BAKUTEL 18th Azerbaijan International Telecommunications and Information Technologies Exhibition and Conference November 6-9 Oh my, it could be one misunderstanding, so when I checked the Bakutel site, that's it the logo of IGF on the right side, and the most recent news on Bakutel is the UN IGF announce http://www.bakutel.az/2012/?p=news__read&t=top&q=56&l=en It may be some misinterpretation, but my perception leads me to believe that the organizers put the IGF as an event within the Bakutel, or something in the background. But either way it's quite a coincidence that at a time we strive to show the world that the Internet is not an appendix telecommunications, WICT on how they want to define, ICTs within the definition of telecommunications. What really awaits us in this issue of the IGF? An invasion of telecom executives is a concrete probability ... -- João Carlos Caribé Publicitário e Consultor de mídias sociais http://entropia.blog.br caribe at entropia.blog.br twitter @caribe / skype joaocaribe (21) 8761 1967 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From katycarvt at gmail.com Mon Oct 15 14:11:30 2012 From: katycarvt at gmail.com (Katy P) Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 11:11:30 -0700 Subject: [governance] Bad signs ? IGF inside Bakutel ? In-Reply-To: <7D22FD4B-255D-4D9A-97C7-300480A6D70D@entropia.blog.br> References: <7D22FD4B-255D-4D9A-97C7-300480A6D70D@entropia.blog.br> Message-ID: I think they changed the BakuTel dates. On Oct 15, 2012 11:08 AM, "Joao Carlos Caribe" wrote: > I'm just checking the IGF 2012 meeting venue at Baku Expo Exhibition and > Convention Center and checking the Expo Center schedule I found on the date > of IGF other event called "Bakutel" > http://www.bakuexpocenter.az/en/exhibitions.php > > *BAKUTEL* > 18th Azerbaijan International > Telecommunications and Information Technologies > Exhibition and Conference > November 6-9 > > Oh my, it could be one misunderstanding, so when I checked the Bakutel > site, that's it the logo of IGF on the right side, and the most recent news > on Bakutel is the UN IGF announce > http://www.bakutel.az/2012/?p=news__read&t=top&q=56&l=en > > It may be some misinterpretation, but my perception leads me to believe that > the organizers put the IGF as an event within the Bakutel, or something in > the background. But either way it's quite a coincidence that at a time we > strive to show the world that the Internet is not an appendix > telecommunications, WICT on how they want to define, ICTs within the > definition of telecommunications. > > What really awaits us in this issue of the IGF? An invasion of telecom > executives is a concrete probability ... > > -- > João Carlos Caribé > Publicitário e Consultor de mídias sociais > http://entropia.blog.br > caribe at entropia.blog.br > twitter @caribe / skype joaocaribe > (21) 8761 1967 > > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From lucabelli at hotmail.it Tue Oct 16 04:41:43 2012 From: lucabelli at hotmail.it (Luca Belli) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:41:43 +0200 Subject: [governance] Open Invitation to IGF Workshop 146 Message-ID: Dear list members, This mail is to invite you to the IGF Workshop 146 “Intellectual Property Rights and the freedom to share: are the two compatible?” that will take place at the Baku Expo Exhibition and Convention Centre (room 4) on November 8th from 11:00 to 12:30 (GMT +4). The workshop has been organised by a group of alumni of the ISOC Next Generation Leaders Programme under the mentorship of the Internet Society and will focus on the tension between the fundamental intellectual property rights – notably, copyright – and “the more liberal freedom to share, which is a unique attribute of the emerging information society and represents the quintessence of the right to receive and impart information and ideas”. The purpose of the workshop is to trigger a dynamic discussion between the attendees and the panellists in order to analyse the different nuances of the issues at stake. For this reason, we welcome the participation of the audience, be it on-site or remote. Knowing that many members of this list are truly passionate about IPR issues, we urge you to join our debate and share with us your standpoint. Further details on the workshop may be found here http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/w2012/proposals Further details on the ISOC Next Generation Leaders Programme may be found here http://www.internetsociety.org/ Please, feel free to circulate this invitation. We look forward to meeting you in Baku. Best regards The organisers of the IGF workshop 146 Luca Belli Doctorant en Droit PublicCERSA,Université Panthéon-AssasSorbonne University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 16 08:08:24 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 15:08:24 +0300 Subject: [governance] Gary McKinnon extradition decision - live coverage Message-ID: <507D4E38.4080508@gmail.com> [Pity that the EU Court of Human Rights ignored torture risks in the US for muslims (that prepares the way for extradition of Assange should the matter come up - first they came for the muslims eh?)... at least the UK court provided a good judgement in this case... I mean the UN special rapporteur could not be that wrong about US treatment of special prisoners... Gary McKinnon extradition decision - live coverage *Live*After a decade-long legal battle, hacker will learn whether or not he has won his battle to avoid extradition to the US * * Lizzy Davies * o Lizzy Davies o guardian.co.uk , Tuesday 16 October 2012 13.01 BST Gary McKinnon Gary McKinnon at Bow Street magistrates court in London in 2006. Photograph: Bruno Vincent/Getty Images *Live* Sort by: * Latest first * Oldest first Auto update: * On * Off Full May statement Here's the home secretary's statement to the House verbatim. Since I came into office, the sole issue on which I have been required to make a decision is whether Mr McKinnon's extradition to the United States would breach his human rights. Mr McKinnon is accused of serious crimes. But there is also no doubt that he is seriously ill. He has Asperger's Syndrome, and suffers from depressive illness. The legal question before me is now whether the extent of that illness is sufficient to preclude extradition. After careful consideration of all of the relevant material, I have concluded that Mr McKinnon's extradition would give rise to such a high risk of him ending his life that a decision to extradite would be incompatible with Mr McKinnon's human rights. I have therefore withdrawn the extradition order against Mr McKinnon. It will now be for the director of public prosecutions to decide whether Mr McKinnon has a case to answer in a UK court. 13:03 BST "A victory for compassion" Relief for McKinnon's Tory MP David Burrowes- not only because his constituent is staying here, but also, presumably, because he doesn't have to resign. Today is a victory for compassion, and pre-election promises being kept. 13:01 BST Patrick Wintour @*patrickwintour* T May (nearly) "I have concluded that Mr McKinnon's extradiiton gave rise to a high risk that I would be demolished by the Daily Mail" 16 Oct 12 * *Reply* * *Retweet* * *Favorite* A rather more sceptical Tweet from the Guardian's political editor. In its Affront to British Justice campaign, the Daily Mail has pushed for McKinnon and others in a similar position to stand trial in the UK. 12:59 BST Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, has welcomed the move to save McKinnon from extradition. She has issued a statement saying: Extradition should prevent fugitives escaping -- not allow for Britons like Gary to be parcelled off around the world based on allegations of offences committed here at home. This campaign, led by Gary's fearless mother, united lawyers, politicians, press and public from across the spectrum in the cause of compassion and common sense. 12:53 BST McKinnon verdict welcomed by MPs Keith Vaz MP @*Keith_VazMP* Excellent result on Gary. Exactly what Home affairs recommended. Well done Janis Sharp and David Burrows MP +the Daily Mail#GaryMckinnon 16 Oct 12 * *Reply* * *Retweet* * *Favorite* Caroline Lucas @*CarolineLucas* Fantastic news that Gary McKinnon will not be extradited! Congrats to @*JanisSharp* & everyone involved #*freegary* 16 Oct 12 * *Reply* * *Retweet* * *Favorite* Julian Huppert * ? @*julianhuppert* Gary McKinnon statement now... He will stay here and not be extradited. Fantastic news!!! #*fb* 16 Oct 12 * *Reply* * *Retweet* * *Favorite* Alistair Carmichael @*acarmichaelmp* Being in government can be difficult but sometimes it can be bloody brilliant too! #*freegary* 16 Oct 12 * *Reply* * *Retweet* * *Favorite* 12:49 BST Over to the DPP Some more detail on the dramatic Gary McKinnon announcement. May said the sole issue she was considering in the case was whether extradition to the United States "would breach his human rights". There was no doubt, she said, that McKinnon was "seriously ill" and the extradition warrant against him should therefore be withdrawn. It is now for the director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer QC to decide whether he should face trial in the UK, the home secretary added. 12:46 BST US-UK extradition "sound" May says the US-UK extradition arrangement is "broadly sound" and brings benefits to both countries, as seen recently with the extradition of Abu Hamza and other terrorist suspects. She says that while there is "a perception of imbalance", the review carried out by Sir Scott Baker found this was not grounded in fact. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lizzy-Davies-004.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 7934 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Gary-McKinnon-011.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 65712 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 438c27e7731adb6e780f55334f21728f_normal.png Type: image/png Size: 3807 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: lz4uyj9vi64xznjalwt4_normal.png Type: image/png Size: 3841 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: twitterProfilePhoto_normal.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1659 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Huppert_image_normal.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1756 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: c4496kn5o9ac4p3a8ctx_normal.jpeg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1467 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From jpohle at vub.ac.be Tue Oct 16 12:17:46 2012 From: jpohle at vub.ac.be (Julia Pohle) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 18:17:46 +0200 Subject: [governance] 7th GigaNet Symposium, 5 Nov 2012: registration is open In-Reply-To: <507D8859.3000306@vub.ac.be> References: <507D8859.3000306@vub.ac.be> Message-ID: <507D88AA.1070202@vub.ac.be> Registration for the next GigaNet symposium, taking place as a pre-event to the UN IGF on 5 November in Baku, is now open: http://www.amiando.com/giganet2012 Please find below the final program: *GIGANET 7th Annual Symposium* 5 November 2012 Pre-conference to the UN Internet Governance Forum Baku Expo Exhibition and Convention Center, Baku, Azerbaijan http://www.amiando.com/giganet2012 *Program * 9:00 -- 10:00 - The UN, the ITU and Internet governance Contested Boundaries: The International Telecommunication Regulations and Internet Governance. William Drake -- University of Zurich New Issue Domains in the UN Ambit: Negotiating Meanings for Security in Cyberspace. Roxane Radu -- Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Regionalism and the Caribbean Internet Governance Forum. Dhanaraj Thakur -- University of the West Indies 10.00 -- 11:15 -- The role of private actors in Internet governance A Quantitative Study of the Factors Driving DPI Deployment by Network Operators Worldwide. Hadi Asghari and Michel Van Eeten -- Delft University of Technology; Milton Mueller -- Syracuse University; Shirin Tabatabaie -- Delft University of Technology From Neutral Thirds to Private Law Enforcers. Nicole van der Meulen and Arno Lodder -- Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Internet Policies and Corporate Social Responsibility. Rolf H. Weber -- University of Zurich 11.15 -- 11.45 Coffee break 11:45 -- 13:00 -- Governance of critical Internet resources Dimensioning the Elephant: An Empirical Analysis of the IPv4 Transfer Market. Milton Mueller and Brenden Kuerbis, Syracuse University Laying the Path: Technical Approaches to Legal and Policy Issues in Internet Design. Sandra Braman -- University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee Impact of the New gTLD Program: Domain Name Regulation Revolution in China. Hongbin Zhu -- China Internet Network Information Centre 13.00 -- 14.30: Lunch 14.30 -- 15.45: The Internet, civic engagement and state repression Media Disruption and Revolutionary Unrest: Evidence from Mubarak's Quasi-Experiment. Navid Hassanpour -- Yale University The Effects of the Internet on Civic Engagement Under Authoritarianism. The Case of Azerbaijan. Katy Pearce and Sarah Kendzior -- University of Washington; Deen Freelon -- American University Digital Citizenship in the South Caucasus: A Comparative Analysis between Armenia, Georgia and Azerbaijan. Wayne Buente -- University of Hawaii; Lala Hajibayova -- Indiana University 15.45 -- 16.15: Coffee 16.15 -- 17.30: Cyber security, privacy and copyright Cookies versus Clams. Tracking Technologies and their Implications for Online Privacy. Andreas Kuehn -- Syracuse University The Evolution of Formal and Informal Institutions related to Cyber-Security: A Comparison of China and India. Nir Kshetri -- University of North Carolina Discourse Networks on Access Blocking in France and Germany and the European Union. Yana Breindl -- Georg-August Universität Göttingen 18.00 -- 19.30: Closing reception Registration and contact The symposium is free of charge. Please visit our conference website for registration and additional information: http://www.amiando.com/giganet2012 ____________________________________________________________ *Julia Pohle* | Researcher iMinds - Digital Society SMIT, Studies on Media, Information & Telecommunication Vrije Universiteit Brussel Julia.Pohle at vub.ac.be office: +32 2 629 16 32 mobile: +32 488 596721 Pleinlaan 9 | 1050 Brussels | Belgium http://smit.vub.ac.be _______________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Wed Oct 17 05:14:21 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:14:21 +0300 Subject: [governance] US disappointed by 'laughable' decision on Gary McKinnon Message-ID: <507E76ED.2080607@gmail.com> [Torture is just sooo funneeeeee] US disappointed by 'laughable' decision on Gary McKinnon State Department officials will study ruling and could ask Interpol to issue red notice Nikhil Kumar Author Biography New York Wednesday 17 October 2012 The American government expressed its disappointment last night after the Home Secretary halted Gary McKinnon's extradition to the US. The State Department said it was examining the ruling by Theresa May yesterday to block the extradition of the 46-year-old computer hacker with Asperger's syndrome and severe depression as it would be "incompatible with human rights". Victoria Nuland, a spokeswoman for the department, said the US "was disappointed by the decision" to deny Mr McKinnon's transfer across the Atlantic to face what she called "long overdue justice in the United States". For 10 years, American prosecutors have been seeking to bring Mr McKinnon to the US to face trial for hacking into military computers. It is claimed that Mr McKinnon damaged scores of machines as a result. He denies any malicious intent, saying instead that he was looking for files related to UFOs. Earlier this year, the Prime Minister David Cameron raised the case with Barack Obama. On a visit to Washington, Mr Cameron acknowledged that Mr McKinnon was accused of a "very important and significant crime" but that he was hoping that "a way through can be found". The US Department of Justice said that it was also disappointed at the Home Secretary's decision, "particularly given the past decisions of the UK courts and prior Home Secretaries that he should face trial in the United States". It did not, however, view the ruling as a precedent for other cases. "The Home Secretary has described this case as exceptional and, thus, this decision does not set a precedent for future cases," said Rebekah Carmichael, a spokeswoman for the department. "The Home Secretary has acknowledged that Mr. McKinnon is accused of serious crimes". She added that, despite this ruling, the US-UK extradition relationship "remains strong, as is demonstrated by the extradition of five alleged terrorists" to the US earlier in October. "Our extradition treaty serves the interests of both our nations," said Ms Carmichael. Douglas McNabb, a Washington-based expert on US federal law, said that US authorities may yet decide to pursue Mr McKinnon via Interpol, the international policing body. "Now that the Home Secretary has made this decision that, of course, bars the US from seeking his extradition, I think the next step is that they may well ask Interpol to issue a red notice... so that if Mr McKinnon were to travel outside the UK, the red notice would pop up and he would be arrested," he said. This, he explained, would open the door to the possibility of renewed extradition proceedings in the country of his arrest. Another US lawyer, David Rivkin, who worked for the Reagan and Bush administrations, criticised Ms May's decision, saying that to deny the extradition on health grounds was "laughable". "Under that logic, anybody who claims some kind of physical or mental problem can commit crimes with impunity and get away with it," he told the BBC. The US said the extradition relationship remained strong, as shown by the Hamza case -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: plus.png Type: image/png Size: 2999 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Wed Oct 17 05:49:22 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 21:49:22 +1200 Subject: [governance] Caribbean Preparatory Meeting for the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) Message-ID: Dear All, This is a friendly reminder of in Invitation that was sent last month. You are invited to participate in the Preparatory process, hear views and make your views known. Remote Participation is available but you will need to register via http://portal.gctwebcasts.com/synapse/Default.aspx?alias=portal.gctwebcasts.com/synapse/ctu Please spread the word. I look forward to e-seeing you there. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Wed Oct 17 06:09:31 2012 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 12:09:31 +0200 Subject: [governance] GISWatch special edition: in-depth country reports In-Reply-To: References: <1349786154.44220.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web120103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <20121011124947.GN5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> <20121011125212.GO5153@baribal.tarvainen.info> Message-ID: <507E83DB.7050809@apc.org> Dear all Apologies for not being present on the list... this time of year fundraising, regional IGFs, global IGFs, and everything else work-related conspires to make life very difficult. On a more positive note.. I am really pleased to point you to a special edition of Global Information Society Watch which we have just released. It is a follow up on the 2011 report which focused on freedom of expression. http://giswatch.org/blog-entry/756/special-edition-giswatch-2011-update-i This special edition contains in-depth reports from Argentina, Azerbaijan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and South Africa. Anriette ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Wed Oct 17 06:54:51 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 19:54:51 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Extension of online registration Deadline In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: FYI Izumi ----------転送メッセージ---------- From: *Chengetai Masango* 日付: 2012年10月17日水曜日 件名: [igf_members] Extension of online registration Deadline To: igf Forum Dear All, Due to quite a large number requests to extend the online registration deadline for IGF Baku, the deadline has been extended to *Sunday, 21 October *. No further extensions will be possible after this date. Best regards Chengetai -- >> 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: -------------- 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 From bommelaer at isoc.org Wed Oct 17 10:31:32 2012 From: bommelaer at isoc.org (Constance Bommelaer) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 16:31:32 +0200 Subject: [governance] Join online discussions to prepare the first WSIS+10 Review event (Until 29 October) In-Reply-To: <507EBDEB.10702@isoc.org> References: <507EBDEB.10702@isoc.org> Message-ID: <507EC144.4020600@isoc.org> Dear all, We would like to bring to your attention that UNESCO has launched a consultation to prepare for the WSIS+10 Review. Detailed explanations on the consultation and how to contribute are available at the end of this note. Thank you and best regards, Constance Bommelaer -----Original Message----- From: WSIS Knowledge Communities [mailto:wsisplatform at unesco.org] Sent: Friday, October 05, 2012 11:30 To: Yamanaka, Mika Subject: Join online discussions to prepare jointly the first WSIS+10 review event (Until 29 October) Dear WSIS KC members, In cooperation with ITU, UNDP and UNCTAD, UNESCO is hosting the first review multistakeholder WSIS+10 event "Towards Knowledge Societies for Peace and Sustainable Development" that will take place at UNESCO Headquarters, Paris, France, from 25-27 February 2013. This multistakeholder and high-level event will bring governments, civil society, the private sector and international organizations together on key knowledge societies topics; we will review WSIS developments, discuss current and future knowledge society trends and formulate post-2015 recommendations The second phase of the open consultations is now launched at the WSIS Knowledge Communities (WSIS KC - www.wsis-community.org). You are invited to contribute to online discussions on themes, format and the process leading to the 2013 WSIS+10 review event until 29 October by clicking: http://www.wsis-community.org/pg/forum/topic/583571/what-are-your-views-on-key-topics-the-preparatory-process-and-format-for-the-upcoming-2013-wsis10-review-event-background-info-below/. We are requesting your ideas and input on A) Themes: 1. Key recent trends (social networking etc.-best relevant for many Action Lines) -- and how these trends should best be discussed/addressed at this meeting (see 3.) 2. Key future knowledge and sustainable development trends B) Format, for example: 3. How can above themes best be addressed in a cross-cutting manner, bringing together different Action Lines on key topics? C) Process leading to the 2013 event: 4. In the context of scarce budgets, how can we still best facilitate the contributions and input from different stakeholders to the preparatory process and to the 2013 event, including of the most marginalized? Please share your ideas in this event! -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Wed Oct 17 21:20:58 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:20:58 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> References: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> Message-ID: Dear list, APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. Comments welcome. izumi ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Date: 2012/10/12 Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable To: igf_members at intgovforum.org Dear Colleaques, We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. Best regards Alice ------------------------------ HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE IGF 2012 Background During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the session includes feedback from the cross-cutting themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet intermediary liability. Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various main sessions and workshops. Objective The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main sessions and the main IGF theme. Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary liability, cybercrime, among others. Format The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 02:26:29 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:26:29 +1200 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] Message-ID: I agree Izumi. +1 What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to show that you don't support the Proposal). Kind Regards On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > > Comments welcome. > > izumi > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: > Date: 2012/10/12 > Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > To: igf_members at intgovforum.org > > > Dear Colleaques, > > We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. > > Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. > > Best regards > Alice > > ------------------------------ > > HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE > IGF 2012 > > Background > > During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to > develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were > proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking > Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the > session includes feedback from the cross-cutting > > themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by > other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. > > Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that > approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum > make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, > freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet > intermediary liability. > > Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for > transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer > complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. > > Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, > including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There > are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as > well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. > > Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the > workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on > freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. > > Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, > particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. > > Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would > like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look > at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various > main sessions and workshops. > > > Objective > > The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive > feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which > human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use > those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It > will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights > and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders > have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the > internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding > of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main > sessions and the main IGF theme. > > Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary > liability, cybercrime, among others. > > Format > > The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which > speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and > workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF > session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 02:31:14 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:01:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1! On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > I agree Izumi. +1 > > What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to > show that you don't support the Proposal). > > Kind Regards > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: >> Date: 2012/10/12 >> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >> >> >> Dear Colleaques, >> >> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >> >> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >> >> Best regards >> Alice >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >> IGF 2012 >> >> Background >> >> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >> >> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >> >> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >> intermediary liability. >> >> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >> >> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >> >> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >> >> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >> >> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >> main sessions and workshops. >> >> >> Objective >> >> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >> sessions and the main IGF theme. >> >> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >> liability, cybercrime, among others. >> >> Format >> >> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From bertrand.kabembela at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 02:45:12 2012 From: bertrand.kabembela at gmail.com (Bertrand KABEMBELA) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:45:12 +0200 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I agree with this proposal. + 1 Kind Regards Bertrand 2012/10/18, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro : > I agree Izumi. +1 > > What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to show > that you don't support the Proposal). > > Kind Regards > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: >> Date: 2012/10/12 >> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >> >> >> Dear Colleaques, >> >> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >> >> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >> >> Best regards >> Alice >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >> IGF 2012 >> >> Background >> >> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >> >> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >> >> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance >> Forum >> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including >> privacy, >> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >> intermediary liability. >> >> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing >> consumer >> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >> >> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, >> as >> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >> >> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of >> the >> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >> >> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >> >> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >> main sessions and workshops. >> >> >> Objective >> >> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to >> which >> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various >> stakeholders >> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >> sessions and the main IGF theme. >> >> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >> liability, cybercrime, among others. >> >> Format >> >> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > -- * -------------------------------------------------------- Me Bertrand KABEMBELA * * * *Avocat près la Cour d'Appel de Lubumbashi * *Tél : +243 998879260* *Email : bertrandkabembela at yahoo.fr, bertrand.kabembela at gmail.com* -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Thu Oct 18 02:48:47 2012 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 23:48:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1350542927.17339.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> + 1   Imran >________________________________ > From: Chaitanya Dhareshwar >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >Cc: Izumi AIZU >Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2012, 11:31 >Subject: Re: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] > > >+1! > > >On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > >I agree Izumi. +1 >> >> >>What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to show that you don't support the Proposal). >> >> >>Kind Regards >> >> >>On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >>Dear list, >>> >>>APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >>> >>>Comments welcome. >>> >>>izumi >>> >>> >>> >>>---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>From:   >>>Date: 2012/10/12 >>>Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >>>To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >>> >>> >>>Dear Colleaques, >>> >>>We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >>> >>>Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >>> >>>Best regards >>>Alice >>> >>>------------------------------ >>> >>>HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >>>IGF 2012 >>> >>>Background >>> >>>During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >>>develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >>>proposed. Particularly,  the group in charge of structuring the Taking >>>Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >>>session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >>> >>>themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >>>other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >>> >>>Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >>>approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >>>make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >>>freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >>>intermediary liability. >>> >>>Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >>>transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >>>complaints.  Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >>> >>>Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >>>including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >>>are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >>>well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >>> >>>Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >>>workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >>>freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >>> >>>Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >>>particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >>> >>>Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >>>like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >>>at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >>>main sessions and workshops. >>> >>> >>>Objective >>> >>>The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >>>feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >>>human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >>>those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session.  It >>>will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >>>and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >>>have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >>>internet governance debate.  It will also help to increase understanding >>>of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >>>sessions and the main IGF theme. >>> >>>Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >>>liability, cybercrime, among others. >>> >>>Format >>> >>>The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >>>speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >>>workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >>>session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >>> >>> >>>____________________________________________________________ >>>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 >>> >>> >> >> >> >>-- >> >>Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>P.O. Box 17862 >>Suva >>Fiji >> >> >>Twitter: @SalanietaT >>Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>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 >> >> > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Oct 18 02:52:00 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:22:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: References: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> Message-ID: <507FA710.2020308@itforchange.net> Dear Izumi, As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea whether any clarification is provided on my comments or not, you can make the case for that here. Best regards, parminder On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > > Comments welcome. > > izumi > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: > Date: 2012/10/12 > Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > To: igf_members at intgovforum.org > > > Dear Colleaques, > > We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. > > Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. > > Best regards > Alice > > ------------------------------ > > HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE > IGF 2012 > > Background > > During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to > develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were > proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking > Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the > session includes feedback from the cross-cutting > > themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by > other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. > > Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that > approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum > make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, > freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet > intermediary liability. > > Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for > transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer > complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. > > Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, > including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There > are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as > well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. > > Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the > workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on > freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. > > Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, > particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. > > Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would > like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look > at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various > main sessions and workshops. > > > Objective > > The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive > feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which > human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use > those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It > will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights > and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders > have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the > internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding > of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main > sessions and the main IGF theme. > > Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary > liability, cybercrime, among others. > > Format > > The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which > speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and > workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF > session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dabora666 at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 02:56:27 2012 From: dabora666 at gmail.com (Dabora Lee) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:56:27 +0500 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi, I agree....(+1) On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > I agree Izumi. +1 > > What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to > show that you don't support the Proposal). > > Kind Regards > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: >> Date: 2012/10/12 >> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >> >> >> Dear Colleaques, >> >> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >> >> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >> >> Best regards >> Alice >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >> IGF 2012 >> >> Background >> >> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >> >> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >> >> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >> intermediary liability. >> >> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >> >> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >> >> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >> >> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >> >> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >> main sessions and workshops. >> >> >> Objective >> >> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >> sessions and the main IGF theme. >> >> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >> liability, cybercrime, among others. >> >> Format >> >> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Oct 18 03:18:36 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:48:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <507CD909.4040303@itforchange.net> References: <507CD909.4040303@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <507FAD4C.1020205@itforchange.net> this is the comment I sent to the MAG (multistakeholder advisory group) of the IGF. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:18:25 +0530 From: parminder To: igf_members at intgovforum.org Dear Alice/ All, Apologies for intrusion by someone who, I understand, has an observer status on this list. This initiative of a round table on human rights is very important. Since it is not just an workshop, but a higher level activity with some kind of a larger IGF/ MAG ownership (do I understand it right!), we have to be especially careful about framing the background note and agenda. In this regard I have the following observations to make. (1) Consumer rights are not considered as human rights. Consumer rights are based on private contracts, although the consumer as the structurally weaker party in such contracts is provided some special general protections which are embodied in consumer rights. Human rights are based on the social contract. (There are those who go even further and claim that they are kind of part of our 'natural condition' but I dont buy that.) I do not think we should include consumer rights as part of human rights. It greatly dilutes the discourse of human rights, and their legitimacy. (2) The background note focusses exclusively on civil and political rights, like privacy, FoE, and does not mention social, economic and cultural rights at all. It is useful to refer in this regard the opening paragraphs of the Geneva Declaration that speaks of indivisibility of human rights, and the need to take all kinds and categories of human rights together. In context of the Internet, one can immediately think of human rights issues like, universal access (especially with some countries already treating it as a right) and net neutrality. There are others as well, like cultural rights involved in multilingualism, domain name allocations etc. It will be good if we can expand the note to give representation and space to all kinds of human rights and not just civil and political rights. Alternatively, maybe we can call the event as a round table on civil and political rights. This is for your consideration. Also, can I share this note with civil society groups for their comments? best regards, parminder On Friday 12 October 2012 12:05 PM, alice at apc.org wrote: > Dear Colleaques, > > We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. > > Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. > > Best regards > Alice > > ------------------------------ > > HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE > IGF 2012 > > Background > > During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to > develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were > proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking > Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the > session includes feedback from the cross-cutting > > themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by > other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. > > Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that > approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum > make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, > freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet > intermediary liability. > > Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for > transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer > complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. > > Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, > including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There > are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as > well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. > > Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the > workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on > freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. > > Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, > particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. > > Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would > like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look > at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various > main sessions and workshops. > > > Objective > > The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive > feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which > human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use > those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It > will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights > and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders > have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the > internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding > of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main > sessions and the main IGF theme. > > Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary > liability, cybercrime, among others. > > Format > > The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which > speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and > workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF > session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. > > > > _______________________________________________ > igf_members mailing list > igf_members at intgovforum.org > http://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igf_members_intgovforum.org > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at Thu Oct 18 03:45:49 2012 From: wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at (Benedek, Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at)) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:45:49 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <507FAD4C.1020205@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Dear Parminder, while I agree that consumer rights are different from human rights, I want to emphasize that they can and should have an effect on consumer rights. State bodies bound by human rights should regulate private actors in a way that that they respect human rights, i.e. in the field of data protection, freedom of expression or quality of services, which might also relate to economic, social or cultural rights, like the right to education. In this context, the Council of Europe has established a Committee of Experts on (Human) Rights of Internet Users, which recently has started it s work with the objective to elaborate what are (human) rights of internet users. We are aware that this is a difficult area, precisely for the reasons You mentioned, but think that because of the practical effects which terms of service and other private agreements do have on the realization of human rights of users, there is a need to look at these private contracts from a human rights perspective. Best regards Wolfgang Benedek Von: parminder > Antworten an: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >, parminder > Datum: Donnerstag, 18. Oktober 2012 09:18 An: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" > Betreff: [governance] Fwd: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable this is the comment I sent to the MAG (multistakeholder advisory group) of the IGF. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:18:25 +0530 From: parminder To: igf_members at intgovforum.org Dear Alice/ All, Apologies for intrusion by someone who, I understand, has an observer status on this list. This initiative of a round table on human rights is very important. Since it is not just an workshop, but a higher level activity with some kind of a larger IGF/ MAG ownership (do I understand it right!), we have to be especially careful about framing the background note and agenda. In this regard I have the following observations to make. (1) Consumer rights are not considered as human rights. Consumer rights are based on private contracts, although the consumer as the structurally weaker party in such contracts is provided some special general protections which are embodied in consumer rights. Human rights are based on the social contract. (There are those who go even further and claim that they are kind of part of our 'natural condition' but I dont buy that.) I do not think we should include consumer rights as part of human rights. It greatly dilutes the discourse of human rights, and their legitimacy. (2) The background note focusses exclusively on civil and political rights, like privacy, FoE, and does not mention social, economic and cultural rights at all. It is useful to refer in this regard the opening paragraphs of the Geneva Declaration that speaks of indivisibility of human rights, and the need to take all kinds and categories of human rights together. In context of the Internet, one can immediately think of human rights issues like, universal access (especially with some countries already treating it as a right) and net neutrality. There are others as well, like cultural rights involved in multilingualism, domain name allocations etc. It will be good if we can expand the note to give representation and space to all kinds of human rights and not just civil and political rights. Alternatively, maybe we can call the event as a round table on civil and political rights. This is for your consideration. Also, can I share this note with civil society groups for their comments? best regards, parminder On Friday 12 October 2012 12:05 PM, alice at apc.org wrote: Dear Colleaques, We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. Best regards Alice ------------------------------ HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE IGF 2012 Background During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the session includes feedback from the cross-cutting themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet intermediary liability. Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various main sessions and workshops. Objective The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main sessions and the main IGF theme. Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary liability, cybercrime, among others. Format The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. _______________________________________________ igf_members mailing list igf_members at intgovforum.orghttp://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igf_members_intgovforum.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at Thu Oct 18 03:55:52 2012 From: wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at (Benedek, Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek@uni-graz.at)) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:55:52 +0200 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: Message-ID: accordingly +1 from me, regards Wolfgang Benedek Am 18.10.12 03:20 schrieb "Izumi AIZU" unter : >Dear list, > >APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > >Comments welcome. > >izumi > > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: >Date: 2012/10/12 >Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >To: igf_members at intgovforum.org > > >Dear Colleaques, > >We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. > >Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. > >Best regards >Alice > >------------------------------ > >HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >IGF 2012 > >Background > >During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >session includes feedback from the cross-cutting > >themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. > >Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >intermediary liability. > >Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. > >Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. > >Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. > >Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. > >Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >main sessions and workshops. > > >Objective > >The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >sessions and the main IGF theme. > >Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >liability, cybercrime, among others. > >Format > >The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. > -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Oct 18 04:08:13 2012 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:08:13 +0800 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <507FAD4C.1020205@itforchange.net> References: <507CD909.4040303@itforchange.net> <507FAD4C.1020205@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <507FB8ED.6040202@ciroap.org> On 18/10/12 15:18, parminder wrote: > > (1) Consumer rights are not considered as human rights. Consumer > rights are based on private contracts, although the consumer as the > structurally weaker party in such contracts is provided some special > general protections which are embodied in consumer rights. Human > rights are based on the social contract. (There are those who go even > further and claim that they are kind of part of our 'natural > condition' but I dont buy that.) I do not think we should include > consumer rights as part of human rights. It greatly dilutes the > discourse of human rights, and their legitimacy. Contextually, consumer rights are human rights, particularly when the issues are related to basic needs for human life such as food, water, housing, and safe environment. Deutch (1995) elaborates the basis for the basic consumer rights as human rights, or least as new human rights. Through international consensus, consumer rights have been given due recognition through the adoption of the United Nations Guidelines on Consumer Protection 1985 (expanded in 1999), which merits on the rights-based approach to emphasise on social justice for consumers who do not have or have limited access to basic goods and services. The abuse of consumer rights has a malign effect on all sectors of the economy and consequences at all levels. In this context, enabling equal access to justice and ending impunity can be accomplished through the promotion and defence of eight basic consumer rights: The right to safety; to be informed; to choose; to be heard; to satisfaction of basic needs; to redress; to consumer education; and, to a healthy and safe environment. The right of all citizens to a basic level of Internet access (in the sense that there is a corresponding duty on the state to provide the same) is also being increasingly recognised though has been debated back and forth on this list. -- *Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* 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 *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice . Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 05:38:05 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:38:05 +0300 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Message-ID: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Updated: 2012-10-18 16:12 ( Xinhua) Comments(*0*) Print Mail Large Medium Small 0 BANJUL - An African Union (AU) Internet expert said Wednesday that Africa would establish its own Internet Exchange Point in Gambia to avoid costly fees paid to overseas service providers. The African Union Commission had decided to finance the African Internet exchange program, one of whose major projects was the Gambia exchange point, Moses Bagingana said at the opening ceremony of a stakeholders' forum here about ways to establish the site. He said Africa needed to find ways of optimizing Internet traffic in the continent and boosting Internet connection with other continents. Bagingana said the Internet exchange program would encourage regional trade integration, and create various opportunities for Africans. Gambian Minister of Communication Information and Infrastructure Nancy Nyang said Gambia was attaching great importance to the program, noting Internet broad band cables would be launched very soon to improve international connectivity. AU leaders have adopted a declaration to strengthen national and regional broad band infrastructure and build up the Gambia Internet exchange point. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-10/18/content_15828459.htm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: icons_comment1.gif Type: image/gif Size: 79 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: icons_print.gif Type: image/gif Size: 77 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: icon-mail.gif Type: image/gif Size: 68 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: icon-font.gif Type: image/gif Size: 85 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From skiden at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 10:46:38 2012 From: skiden at gmail.com (Sarah Kiden) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 Message-ID: Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From mazzone at ebu.ch Thu Oct 18 10:54:24 2012 From: mazzone at ebu.ch (Mazzone, Giacomo) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:54:24 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <488E8B79032F7642949B28142651689CF99339B3C7@GVAMAIL.gva.ebu.ch> No. I have not From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Sarah Kiden Sent: jeudi, 18. octobre 2012 16:47 To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden > Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by the mailgateway ************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 10:59:21 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:59:21 -0400 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I haven't received this one. The subject line would disturb me a little???? or am I simply being zenophobic? All the messages I have received have had a subject line that I could understand. Deirdre On 18 October 2012 10:51, Camino Manjon Sierra wrote: > Hi there, > > I have not received that email but I can confirm Murad has dealt with the > visas of the EC officials. > > So I understand there is nothing to fear :) > > The source is good. > > Best regards > > Camino > > ------------------------------ > Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 > From: skiden at gmail.com > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 > > > Greetings, > > I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see > below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. > Has anyone else received an email like this? > > Kind regards, > > Sarah > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *participant at igf2012.az* > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM > Subject: Новое сообщение > To: skiden > > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your > full itinerary and accommodation information to us. > > Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. > > Best Regards, > > Murad Maksudov > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- "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: -------------- 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 From Camino.MANJON at ext.ec.europa.eu Thu Oct 18 11:04:09 2012 From: Camino.MANJON at ext.ec.europa.eu (Camino.MANJON at ext.ec.europa.eu) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:04:09 +0000 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Новое сообщение = new Post From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Deirdre Williams Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 4:59 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Camino Manjon Sierra Subject: Re: [governance] IGF 2012 I haven't received this one. The subject line would disturb me a little???? or am I simply being zenophobic? All the messages I have received have had a subject line that I could understand. Deirdre On 18 October 2012 10:51, Camino Manjon Sierra > wrote: Hi there, I have not received that email but I can confirm Murad has dealt with the visas of the EC officials. So I understand there is nothing to fear :) The source is good. Best regards Camino ________________________________ Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 From: skiden at gmail.com To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden > Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- “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: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Thu Oct 18 11:04:35 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:04:35 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> Message-ID: <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> Hi, Just to clarify: there are quite a few IXes already up and operational in Africa (e.g., see http://nsrc.org/AFRICA/ixp/). My understanding is that the IXP in Gambia being referenced in the body of the article is in the process of being developed (part of a joint project between the AU and ISOC) and that the current effort is actually focused on training the IXP operators. Regards, -drc On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:38 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Updated: 2012-10-18 16:12 > ( Xinhua) > Comments(0) Print Mail Large Medium Small 0 > BANJUL - An African Union (AU) Internet expert said Wednesday that Africa would establish its own Internet Exchange Point in Gambia to avoid costly fees paid to overseas service providers. > > The African Union Commission had decided to finance the African Internet exchange program, one of whose major projects was the Gambia exchange point, Moses Bagingana said at the opening ceremony of a stakeholders' forum here about ways to establish the site. > > He said Africa needed to find ways of optimizing Internet traffic in the continent and boosting Internet connection with other continents. > > Bagingana said the Internet exchange program would encourage regional trade integration, and create various opportunities for Africans. > > Gambian Minister of Communication Information and Infrastructure Nancy Nyang said Gambia was attaching great importance to the program, noting Internet broad band cables would be launched very soon to improve international connectivity. > > AU leaders have adopted a declaration to strengthen national and regional broad band infrastructure and build up the Gambia Internet exchange point. > > http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-10/18/content_15828459.htm > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From hakik at hakik.org Thu Oct 18 11:14:04 2012 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:14:04 +0100 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: <1350542927.17339.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com > References: <1350542927.17339.YahooMailNeo@web125106.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: +1 Hakikur At 07:48 18-10-2012, Imran Ahmed Shah wrote: >+ 1 > >Imran >From: Chaitanya Dhareshwar >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro > >Cc: Izumi AIZU >Sent: Thursday, 18 October 2012, 11:31 >Subject: Re: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please >express your views] > >+1! > >On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro ><salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> >wrote: >I agree Izumi. +1 > >What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 >to show that you don't support the Proposal). > >Kind Regards > >On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU ><iza at anr.org> wrote: >Dear list, > >APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > >Comments welcome. > >izumi > > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >From: <alice at apc.org> >Date: 2012/10/12 >Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >To: igf_members at intgovforum.org > > >Dear Colleaques, > >We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. > >Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. > >Best regards >Alice > >------------------------------ > >HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >IGF 2012 > >Background > >During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >session includes feedback from the cross-cutting > >themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. > >Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >intermediary liability. > >Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. > >Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. > >Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. > >Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. > >Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >main sessions and workshops. > > >Objective > >The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >sessions and the main IGF theme. > >Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >liability, cybercrime, among others. > >Format > >The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > > > >-- >Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >P.O. Box 17862 >Suva >Fiji > >Twitter: @SalanietaT >Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From jam at jacquelinemorris.com Thu Oct 18 11:18:35 2012 From: jam at jacquelinemorris.com (Jacqueline Morris) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:18:35 -0400 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 On Oct 18, 2012 2:31 AM, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" wrote: > +1! > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I agree Izumi. +1 >> >> What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to >> show that you don't support the Proposal). >> >> Kind Regards >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >>> Dear list, >>> >>> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >>> >>> Comments welcome. >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: >>> Date: 2012/10/12 >>> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >>> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >>> >>> >>> Dear Colleaques, >>> >>> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >>> >>> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >>> >>> Best regards >>> Alice >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >>> IGF 2012 >>> >>> Background >>> >>> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >>> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >>> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >>> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >>> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >>> >>> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >>> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >>> >>> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >>> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance >>> Forum >>> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including >>> privacy, >>> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >>> intermediary liability. >>> >>> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >>> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing >>> consumer >>> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >>> >>> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >>> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >>> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, >>> as >>> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >>> >>> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of >>> the >>> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >>> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >>> >>> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >>> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >>> >>> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >>> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >>> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >>> main sessions and workshops. >>> >>> >>> Objective >>> >>> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >>> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to >>> which >>> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >>> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >>> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >>> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various >>> stakeholders >>> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >>> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >>> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >>> sessions and the main IGF theme. >>> >>> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >>> liability, cybercrime, among others. >>> >>> Format >>> >>> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >>> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >>> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >>> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From skiden at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 11:20:02 2012 From: skiden at gmail.com (Sarah Kiden) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:20:02 +0300 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello, Thank you for the responses. Deirdre, I was worried about the subject too. Camino informs us that the source is good. Sarah On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Deirdre Williams < williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: > I haven't received this one. > The subject line would disturb me a little???? or am I simply being > zenophobic? > All the messages I have received have had a subject line that I could > understand. > Deirdre > > On 18 October 2012 10:51, Camino Manjon Sierra < > camino_manjon_83 at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> I have not received that email but I can confirm Murad has dealt with the >> visas of the EC officials. >> >> So I understand there is nothing to fear :) >> >> The source is good. >> >> Best regards >> >> Camino >> >> ------------------------------ >> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 >> From: skiden at gmail.com >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 >> >> >> Greetings, >> >> I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see >> below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. >> Has anyone else received an email like this? >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Sarah >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: *participant at igf2012.az* >> Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM >> Subject: Новое сообщение >> To: skiden >> >> >> Dear Sir/Madam, >> >> Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your >> full itinerary and accommodation information to us. >> >> Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. >> >> Best Regards, >> >> Murad Maksudov >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From katycarvt at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 11:20:56 2012 From: katycarvt at gmail.com (Katy P) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:20:56 -0700 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Although that man works for IGF, I'd be hesitant to give this information. On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Sarah Kiden wrote: > Hello, > > Thank you for the responses. Deirdre, I was worried about the subject too. > Camino informs us that the source is good. > > Sarah > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Deirdre Williams < > williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I haven't received this one. >> The subject line would disturb me a little???? or am I simply being >> zenophobic? >> All the messages I have received have had a subject line that I could >> understand. >> Deirdre >> >> On 18 October 2012 10:51, Camino Manjon Sierra < >> camino_manjon_83 at hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi there, >>> >>> I have not received that email but I can confirm Murad has dealt with >>> the visas of the EC officials. >>> >>> So I understand there is nothing to fear :) >>> >>> The source is good. >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> Camino >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 >>> From: skiden at gmail.com >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 >>> >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see >>> below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. >>> Has anyone else received an email like this? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> >>> Sarah >>> >>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>> From: *participant at igf2012.az* >>> Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM >>> Subject: Новое сообщение >>> To: skiden >>> >>> >>> Dear Sir/Madam, >>> >>> Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your >>> full itinerary and accommodation information to us. >>> >>> Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Murad Maksudov >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> "The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William >> Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From presidencia at internauta.org.ar Thu Oct 18 11:21:08 2012 From: presidencia at internauta.org.ar (Presidencia Internauta) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:21:08 -0300 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 -- *Sergio Salinas Porto Presidente Internauta Argentina Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet /CTA FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet facebook:salinasporto twitter:sergiosalinas MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... Skype:internautaargentina Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819* * * 2012/10/18 Jacqueline Morris > +1 > On Oct 18, 2012 2:31 AM, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > wrote: > >> +1! >> >> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < >> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I agree Izumi. +1 >>> >>> What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to >>> show that you don't support the Proposal). >>> >>> Kind Regards >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >>>> >>>> Comments welcome. >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>> From: >>>> Date: 2012/10/12 >>>> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >>>> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear Colleaques, >>>> >>>> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >>>> >>>> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> Alice >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> >>>> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >>>> IGF 2012 >>>> >>>> Background >>>> >>>> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >>>> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >>>> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >>>> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >>>> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >>>> >>>> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported >>>> by >>>> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >>>> >>>> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >>>> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance >>>> Forum >>>> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including >>>> privacy, >>>> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >>>> intermediary liability. >>>> >>>> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >>>> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing >>>> consumer >>>> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >>>> >>>> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >>>> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. >>>> There >>>> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, >>>> as >>>> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >>>> >>>> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of >>>> the >>>> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >>>> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >>>> >>>> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >>>> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >>>> >>>> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >>>> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which >>>> look >>>> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >>>> main sessions and workshops. >>>> >>>> >>>> Objective >>>> >>>> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >>>> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to >>>> which >>>> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to >>>> use >>>> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >>>> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >>>> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various >>>> stakeholders >>>> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >>>> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >>>> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >>>> sessions and the main IGF theme. >>>> >>>> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >>>> liability, cybercrime, among others. >>>> >>>> Format >>>> >>>> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >>>> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >>>> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >>>> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn Thu Oct 18 11:34:45 2012 From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 16:34:45 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01f301cdad46$1a8ce650$4fa6b2f0$@benjemaa@planet.tn> Yes Sarah, I received the samedi ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 Mobile: +216 41 649 605 Fax: +216 70 825 231 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- De : governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] De la part de Sarah Kiden Envoyé : jeudi 18 octobre 2012 15:47 À : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Objet : [governance] IGF 2012 Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 18 11:50:36 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 08:50:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1350575436.44621.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I got the same information and I had the same "Why is the header in this language?" reaction. 1. If YOU were the one doing Murad's job, at this time, you will be making mistakes in almost every email. 2. The information required here is normal with every event organiser 3. Someone needs to welcome people on arrival and help facilitate their visa (a) 4. Airport to Hotel shuttle needs to be organised (b) Is there a way of doing a and b above if you do not give the information required? It is okay not to send arrival and hotel info, as long as the same persons will not expect to find their names on the pick up list or expect to be welcomed on arrival, or be driven to their hotels.  The persons who communcate to us are in the offices, and the ones who do teh airport part are not the same. You can expect that if the guy at the airport does not have your info, he will not extend any services to you If your mail client allows, you can trace the message source.  Here it is: === Return-path: Envelope-to:you at yourhost.gTLD Delivery-date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:18:47 -0500 Received: from trial.unifiedemail.net ([209.143.131.16]:57208) by magnus.websitewelcome.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TOqvu-0005Hr-Ov for you at yourhost.TLD; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:18:47 -0500 Received: from ([127.0.0.1]) with MailEnable ESMTP; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 10:18:40 -0400 From: "participant at igf2012.az" Subject: =?Windows-1251?B?ze7i7uUg8e7u4fnl7ejl?= To: "You Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="LeT=_Xf6MtQIqWQy9iXjtwQmsHuIjkEA8F" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 07:18:36 -0700 X-Mailer-MsgId: b59j3I4NCjUxX0NEDcHJnMmFnbkVfbHI0+N2dlZDAuLzAsX3hCBy8wQj9ALy4uMy0tAMjE2 Message-ID: Errors-To: List-Unsubscribe: X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.4 X-Spam-Score: 24 X-Spam-Bar: ++ X-Spam-Flag: NO =====     Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Katy P To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Sarah Kiden Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 3:20 PM Subject: Re: [governance] IGF 2012 Although that man works for IGF, I'd be hesitant to give this information. On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Sarah Kiden wrote: Hello, > >Thank you for the responses. Deirdre, I was worried about the subject too. Camino informs us that the source is good. > >Sarah > > > >On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Deirdre Williams wrote: > >I haven't received this one. >>The subject line would disturb me a little???? or am I simply being zenophobic? >>All the messages I have received have had a subject line that I could understand. >>Deirdre >> >> >>On 18 October 2012 10:51, Camino Manjon Sierra wrote: >> >>Hi there, >>>  >>>I have not received that email but I can confirm Murad has dealt with the visas of the EC officials. >>>  >>>So I understand there is nothing to fear :) >>>  >>>The source is good. >>>  >>>Best regards >>>  >>>Camino >>>  >>> >>> >>>________________________________ >>> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 >>>From: skiden at gmail.com >>>To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 >>> >>> >>>Greetings, >>> >>>I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? >>> >>>Kind regards, >>> >>>Sarah >>> >>> >>>---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>From: participant at igf2012.az >>>Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM >>>Subject: Новое сообщение >>>To: skiden >>> >>> >>> >>>Dear Sir/Madam, >>> >>>Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your >>>full itinerary and accommodation information to us. >>> >>>Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. >>> >>>Best Regards, >>> >>>Murad Maksudov >>> >>>____________________________________________________________ >>>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 >>> >>> >> >> >> >>-- >>“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 >> >>____________________________________________________________ >>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 >> >> > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn Thu Oct 18 12:04:19 2012 From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:04:19 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: <01f301cdad46$1a8ce650$4fa6b2f0$@benjemaa@planet.tn> References: <01f301cdad46$1a8ce650$4fa6b2f0$@benjemaa@planet.tn> Message-ID: <021e01cdad4a$3b369370$b1a3ba50$@benjemaa@planet.tn> Sorry, I mean I received the same ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 Mobile: +216 41 649 605 Fax: +216 70 825 231 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- De : governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] De la part de Tijani BEN JEMAA Envoyé : jeudi 18 octobre 2012 16:35 À : governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Sarah Kiden' Objet : RE: [governance] IGF 2012 Yes Sarah, I received the samedi ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 Mobile: +216 41 649 605 Fax: +216 70 825 231 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- De : governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] De la part de Sarah Kiden Envoyé : jeudi 18 octobre 2012 15:47 À : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Objet : [governance] IGF 2012 Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 12:14:33 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 04:14:33 +1200 Subject: [governance] European Governments reject ETNO Proposal Message-ID: Dear All, I found out today at the WCIT consultations in the Carribbean that European Governments rejected the ETNO Proposal. Does anyone have any further and better information on this. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Thu Oct 18 12:18:33 2012 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 23:18:33 +0700 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> Thanks for the clarification, David. I could not think that this would be the first IXP in Africa. So if it is an IXP operators training - from where to set up more operations - that clarifies the strategic role of the initiative set up in Banjul. I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. Norbert Klein Phnom Penh/Cambodia = On 10/18/2012 10:04 PM, David Conrad wrote: > Hi, > > Just to clarify: there are quite a few IXes already up and operational > in Africa (e.g., see http://nsrc.org/AFRICA/ixp/). My understanding > is that the IXP in Gambia being referenced in the body of the article > is in the process of being developed (part of a joint project between > the AU and ISOC) and that the current effort is actually focused on > training the IXP operators. > > Regards, > -drc > > On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:38 AM, Riaz K Tayob > wrote: >> >> >> Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> Updated: 2012-10-18 16:12 >> ( Xinhua) >> Comments(*0*) >> Print Mail >> Large Medium >> Small 0 >> >> BANJUL - An African Union (AU) Internet expert said Wednesday that >> Africa would establish its own Internet Exchange Point in Gambia to >> avoid costly fees paid to overseas service providers. >> >> The African Union Commission had decided to finance the African >> Internet exchange program, one of whose major projects was the Gambia >> exchange point, Moses Bagingana said at the opening ceremony of a >> stakeholders' forum here about ways to establish the site. >> >> He said Africa needed to find ways of optimizing Internet traffic in >> the continent and boosting Internet connection with other continents. >> >> Bagingana said the Internet exchange program would encourage regional >> trade integration, and create various opportunities for Africans. >> >> Gambian Minister of Communication Information and Infrastructure >> Nancy Nyang said Gambia was attaching great importance to the >> program, noting Internet broad band cables would be launched very >> soon to improve international connectivity. >> >> AU leaders have adopted a declaration to strengthen national and >> regional broad band infrastructure and build up the Gambia Internet >> exchange point. >> >> http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-10/18/content_15828459.htm >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From caribe at entropia.blog.br Thu Oct 18 12:21:53 2012 From: caribe at entropia.blog.br (Joao Carlos Caribe) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:21:53 -0300 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7691778C-9C3B-4395-A254-FF7748CA10C8@entropia.blog.br> Yes, I received not exactly that, but one with one individual letter to visa (not the list) and they just requested the intinerary to provide support for visa on airports and air companies. I just sent the intinerary, but they're not requested my accommodation information. Regards. Joao Carlos Caribe Em 18/10/2012, às 11:46, Sarah Kiden escreveu: > Greetings, > > I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? > > Kind regards, > > Sarah > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: participant at igf2012.az > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM > Subject: Новое сообщение > To: skiden > > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your > full itinerary and accommodation information to us. > > Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. > > Best Regards, > > Murad Maksudov > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -- João Carlos Caribé Publicitário e Consultor de mídias sociais http://entropia.blog.br caribe at entropia.blog.br twitter @caribe / skype joaocaribe (21) 8761 1967 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From m.ermert at gmx.de Thu Oct 18 12:30:46 2012 From: m.ermert at gmx.de (Monika Ermert) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 18:30:46 +0200 Subject: [governance] European Governments reject ETNO Proposal In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> Hi Sala, hi all, CEPT has been negotiating its WCIT positions this week. The most recent emails from CEPT sources i got (sometime this afternoon) just confirmed the ongoing negotiations, certainly that might be history already. What are the sources that said CEPT agreed to reject the proposal? Regards, Monika Am 18.10.2012 18:14, schrieb Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro: > Dear All, > > I found out today at the WCIT consultations in the Carribbean that > European Governments rejected the ETNO Proposal. Does anyone have any > further and better information on this. > > Kind Regards, > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 12:32:13 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 04:32:13 +1200 Subject: [governance] European Governments reject ETNO Proposal In-Reply-To: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> References: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> Message-ID: Dr Hill from the ITU and I tell you the Forum in the Caribbean WCIT consultations is just pure awesome On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Monika Ermert wrote: > Hi Sala, hi all, > > CEPT has been negotiating its WCIT positions this week. The most recent > emails from CEPT sources i got (sometime this afternoon) just confirmed the > ongoing negotiations, certainly that might be history already. What are the > sources that said CEPT agreed to reject the proposal? > > Regards, > > Monika > > Am 18.10.2012 18:14, schrieb Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro: > > Dear All, > > I found out today at the WCIT consultations in the Carribbean that > European Governments rejected the ETNO Proposal. Does anyone have any > further and better information on this. > > Kind Regards, > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From bavouc at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 12:33:55 2012 From: bavouc at gmail.com (Martial Bavou[Private Business Account]) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:33:55 +0100 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not sure I got this, but I trace and the source sound to be credible. From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Sarah Kiden Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 3:47 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 12:37:36 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:37:36 -0400 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 (and reading this proposal as effectively recognizing not just multistakeholderism but human rights as "cross-cutting issues" for all groups.) Paul R. Lehto, J.D. On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > I agree Izumi. +1 > > What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to > show that you don't support the Proposal). > > Kind Regards > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: >> Date: 2012/10/12 >> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >> >> >> Dear Colleaques, >> >> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >> >> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >> >> Best regards >> Alice >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >> IGF 2012 >> >> Background >> >> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >> >> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >> >> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >> intermediary liability. >> >> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >> >> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >> >> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >> >> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >> >> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >> main sessions and workshops. >> >> >> Objective >> >> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >> sessions and the main IGF theme. >> >> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >> liability, cybercrime, among others. >> >> Format >> >> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 12:53:26 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:53:26 -0400 Subject: [governance] European Governments reject ETNO Proposal In-Reply-To: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> References: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> Message-ID: HI, On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Monika Ermert wrote: > Hi Sala, hi all, > > CEPT has been negotiating its WCIT positions this week. The most recent > emails from CEPT sources i got (sometime this afternoon) just confirmed the > ongoing negotiations, certainly that might be history already. What are the > sources that said CEPT agreed to reject the proposal? Veni has tweeted about it, as have others: http://twitter.com/search/%23cept http://twitter.com/veni > > Regards, > > Monika > > Am 18.10.2012 18:14, schrieb Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro: > > Dear All, > > I found out today at the WCIT consultations in the Carribbean that European > Governments rejected the ETNO Proposal. Does anyone have any further and > better information on this. > > Kind Regards, > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 13:01:11 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:01:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] European Governments reject ETNO Proposal In-Reply-To: References: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> Message-ID: What I heard was a rather more cautious ETNO have not received support from rather than the European Governments rejected, together with the suggestion that a similar, though not identical, proposal had support from a couple of other un-named countries. However the webcast has been intermittent and sometimes distorted. Deirdre On 18 October 2012 12:32, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dr Hill from the ITU and I tell you the Forum in the Caribbean WCIT > consultations is just pure awesome > > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Monika Ermert wrote: > >> Hi Sala, hi all, >> >> CEPT has been negotiating its WCIT positions this week. The most recent >> emails from CEPT sources i got (sometime this afternoon) just confirmed the >> ongoing negotiations, certainly that might be history already. What are the >> sources that said CEPT agreed to reject the proposal? >> >> Regards, >> >> Monika >> >> Am 18.10.2012 18:14, schrieb Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro: >> >> Dear All, >> >> I found out today at the WCIT consultations in the Carribbean that >> European Governments rejected the ETNO Proposal. Does anyone have any >> further and better information on this. >> >> Kind Regards, >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 13:09:39 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 05:09:39 +1200 Subject: [governance] European Governments reject ETNO Proposal In-Reply-To: References: <50802EB6.2080101@gmx.de> Message-ID: Thanks McTim and Deirdre. Yes I am still seeking clarification. On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:01 AM, Deirdre Williams < williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: > What I heard was a rather more cautious ETNO have not received support > from rather than the European Governments rejected, together with the > suggestion that a similar, though not identical, proposal had support from > a couple of other un-named countries. However the webcast has been > intermittent and sometimes distorted. > Deirdre > > On 18 October 2012 12:32, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < > salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Dr Hill from the ITU and I tell you the Forum in the Caribbean WCIT >> consultations is just pure awesome >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 4:30 AM, Monika Ermert wrote: >> >>> Hi Sala, hi all, >>> >>> CEPT has been negotiating its WCIT positions this week. The most recent >>> emails from CEPT sources i got (sometime this afternoon) just confirmed the >>> ongoing negotiations, certainly that might be history already. What are the >>> sources that said CEPT agreed to reject the proposal? >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Monika >>> >>> Am 18.10.2012 18:14, schrieb Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro: >>> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> I found out today at the WCIT consultations in the Carribbean that >>> European Governments rejected the ETNO Proposal. Does anyone have any >>> further and better information on this. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> -- >>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>> P.O. Box 17862 >>> Suva >>> Fiji >>> >>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >> P.O. Box 17862 >> Suva >> Fiji >> >> Twitter: @SalanietaT >> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >> >> >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Oct 18 13:16:26 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 22:46:26 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5080396A.6070902@itforchange.net> Dear Benedek, On Thursday 18 October 2012 01:15 PM, Benedek, Wolfgang (wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at) wrote: > Dear Parminder, > > while I agree that consumer rights are different from human rights, That is all I am saying. And this distinction is important. Also as discussed below, we are into a kind of framing discussion and this priority mention of consumer rights in a human rights description is not just a casual thing. It is very meaningful, and has to be seen in its meaningfulness (as discussed in brief a little later) > I want to emphasize that they can and should have an effect on > consumer rights. Is there any area where human rights cannot/ may not and should not have an effect? That is the meaning of human rights, they are applicable everywhere. They are very basic, first principles. This does not mean that we can conflate an area where they should be applicable with human rights themselves. Not to make the distinction would be quite detrimental to human rights. Would you not agree as a Prof of human rights? > State bodies bound by human rights should regulate private actors in a > way that that they respect human rights, That has always been so meant. Does not all private activity or even all regulation as human rights areas. What is the sanctity left for human rights if it were to. > i.e. in the field of data protection, freedom of expression or quality > of services, which might also relate to economic, social or cultural > rights, like the right to education. Well just might :). Although none seems concerned that there could be economic, social and cultural rights vis a vis the Internet and IG. Would that exploration not be necessary? Does framing a round table on human rights while completely ignoring these set of positive rights not send a wrong signal, and also a very significant wrong signal. This is my second objection to the present framing of the round table. > > In this context, the Council of Europe has established a Committee of > Experts on (Human) Rights of Internet Users, Hopefully, they would not conflate consumer rights and human rights, or are they likely too. This present round table framing, backed by an European country and some key civil society groups, is foreboding in this regard. > which recently has started it s work with the objective to elaborate > what are (human) rights of internet users. We are aware that this is > a difficult area, precisely for the reasons You mentioned, but think > that because of the practical effects which terms of service and other > private agreements do have on the realization of human rights of > users, there is a need to look at these private contracts from a > human rights perspective. Again, isnt that everything needs to be looked at from a HR angle, which then does not turn everything into human rights. Isnt this a straight forward logic. I am increasingly bothered about certain kind of creeping encroachments and sullying of human rights by a neo-liberal framework. Is anything at all safe or sacrosanct from the god of market? parminder > > Best regards > > Wolfgang Benedek > > Von: parminder > > Antworten an: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org > " >, parminder > > > Datum: Donnerstag, 18. Oktober 2012 09:18 > An: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org > " > > Betreff: [governance] Fwd: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights > Roundtable > > > this is the comment I sent to the MAG (multistakeholder advisory > group) of the IGF. > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 09:18:25 +0530 > From: parminder > To: igf_members at intgovforum.org > > > > Dear Alice/ All, > > Apologies for intrusion by someone who, I understand, has an observer > status on this list. > > This initiative of a round table on human rights is very important. > Since it is not just an workshop, but a higher level activity with > some kind of a larger IGF/ MAG ownership (do I understand it right!), > we have to be especially careful about framing the background note and > agenda. In this regard I have the following observations to make. > > (1) Consumer rights are not considered as human rights. Consumer > rights are based on private contracts, although the consumer as the > structurally weaker party in such contracts is provided some special > general protections which are embodied in consumer rights. Human > rights are based on the social contract. (There are those who go even > further and claim that they are kind of part of our 'natural > condition' but I dont buy that.) I do not think we should include > consumer rights as part of human rights. It greatly dilutes the > discourse of human rights, and their legitimacy. > > (2) The background note focusses exclusively on civil and political > rights, like privacy, FoE, and does not mention social, economic and > cultural rights at all. It is useful to refer in this regard the > opening paragraphs of the Geneva Declaration that speaks of > indivisibility of human rights, and the need to take all kinds and > categories of human rights together. In context of the Internet, one > can immediately think of human rights issues like, universal access > (especially with some countries already treating it as a right) and > net neutrality. There are others as well, like cultural rights > involved in multilingualism, domain name allocations etc. It will be > good if we can expand the note to give representation and space to all > kinds of human rights and not just civil and political rights. > Alternatively, maybe we can call the event as a round table on civil > and political rights. > > This is for your consideration. > > Also, can I share this note with civil society groups for their comments? > > best regards, parminder > > > On Friday 12 October 2012 12:05 PM, alice at apc.org wrote: >> Dear Colleaques, >> >> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >> >> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >> >> Best regards >> Alice >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >> IGF 2012 >> >> Background >> >> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >> >> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by >> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >> >> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum >> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, >> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >> intermediary liability. >> >> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer >> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >> >> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There >> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as >> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >> >> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the >> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >> >> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, >> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >> >> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look >> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >> main sessions and workshops. >> >> >> Objective >> >> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive >> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which >> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use >> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights >> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders >> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase understanding >> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >> sessions and the main IGF theme. >> >> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >> liability, cybercrime, among others. >> >> Format >> >> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which >> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF >> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> igf_members mailing list >> igf_members at intgovforum.orghttp://mail.intgovforum.org/mailman/listinfo/igf_members_intgovforum.org > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 13:34:25 2012 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:34:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +1 Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 18 October 2012 10:21, Presidencia Internauta < presidencia at internauta.org.ar> wrote: > > +1 > > > -- > > *Sergio Salinas Porto > Presidente Internauta Argentina > Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet /CTA > > > FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet > facebook:salinasporto > twitter:sergiosalinas > MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... > Skype:internautaargentina > > > > Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819* > > * > * > 2012/10/18 Jacqueline Morris > >> +1 >> On Oct 18, 2012 2:31 AM, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" >> wrote: >> >>> +1! >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < >>> salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I agree Izumi. +1 >>>> >>>> What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to >>>> show that you don't support the Proposal). >>>> >>>> Kind Regards >>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>> >>>>> Dear list, >>>>> >>>>> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >>>>> >>>>> Comments welcome. >>>>> >>>>> izumi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>>> From: >>>>> Date: 2012/10/12 >>>>> Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >>>>> To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dear Colleaques, >>>>> >>>>> We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >>>>> >>>>> Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> Alice >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >>>>> IGF 2012 >>>>> >>>>> Background >>>>> >>>>> During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to >>>>> develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >>>>> proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the Taking >>>>> Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the >>>>> session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >>>>> >>>>> themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported >>>>> by >>>>> other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >>>>> >>>>> Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that >>>>> approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance >>>>> Forum >>>>> make specific reference to human rights related issues, including >>>>> privacy, >>>>> freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >>>>> intermediary liability. >>>>> >>>>> Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for >>>>> transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing >>>>> consumer >>>>> complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. >>>>> >>>>> Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >>>>> including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. >>>>> There >>>>> are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and >>>>> youth, as >>>>> well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >>>>> >>>>> Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of >>>>> the >>>>> workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on >>>>> freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. >>>>> >>>>> Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop >>>>> proposals, >>>>> particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. >>>>> >>>>> Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would >>>>> like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which >>>>> look >>>>> at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various >>>>> main sessions and workshops. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Objective >>>>> >>>>> The objective of the human rights round table is to gather >>>>> comprehensive >>>>> feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to >>>>> which >>>>> human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to >>>>> use >>>>> those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. It >>>>> will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human >>>>> rights >>>>> and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various >>>>> stakeholders >>>>> have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the >>>>> internet governance debate. It will also help to increase >>>>> understanding >>>>> of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >>>>> sessions and the main IGF theme. >>>>> >>>>> Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >>>>> liability, cybercrime, among others. >>>>> >>>>> Format >>>>> >>>>> The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in >>>>> which >>>>> speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >>>>> workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the >>>>> TSWF >>>>> session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>>> P.O. Box 17862 >>>> Suva >>>> Fiji >>>> >>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From carolyn at anhalt.org Thu Oct 18 13:37:25 2012 From: carolyn at anhalt.org (Carolyn Anhalt) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:37:25 -0400 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:33 PM, Martial Bavou[Private Business Account] wrote: > Not sure I got this, but I trace and the source sound to be credible. > > Curious how you figure this is credible - previous communications from Murad came from a different account and source, for instance: Message-Id: Cc: "" X-Mailer: iPad Mail (9B206) From: Murad Maksudov The address on this current announcement from "participant" seems quite vague and suspicious. -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Thu Oct 18 13:53:36 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 13:53:36 -0400 Subject: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. References: <205f9732c5ce25f37a2c1b5dcfb28f9a@igf2012.az> Message-ID: <5E4C95E6-A05E-49C6-8EEB-A72569A9CF72@uzh.ch> from the MAG list… Begin forwarded message: > From: nariman.hajiyev at igf2012.az > Date: October 18, 2012 12:29:39 PM EDT > To: William Drake > Cc: MAG > Subject: Re: Fwd: Новое сообщение > > Dear Bill, > > Thanks for sorting out detailed required list of documents. > > Regarding the nature of this request, it is to arrange the pick up for the forum participants from the airport and ensure the proper planning of shuttle routes to the accommodation points. > > The only issue, causing the misunderstanding was that last email was sent not intentionally from the computer, which didn’t allow to our staff finish the email, without subject and the reason of the email. > > Again, just to reconfirm, the reason of the latest unfinished email (request for flight details > and hotels) just for the free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants, which we are used to make during the international events. > > Again sorry for that, and kindly ask you to disseminate this email around your friends. > > From our side, the corrected email will be sent to all the attendees again, on behalf of the Secretariat. > > Best Regards, > > Nariman > On 2012-10-18 20:34, William Drake wrote: >> Hello >> >> Coming on the heels of the passport number disclosure event, concerns >> have been expressed by some of the participants who have received the >> below message. I would greatly appreciate if the host country could >> clarify why flight and hotel information is being collected now, and >> whether there will be any further additions to the entry requirements >> in the days remaining. >> >> People are trying to piece together the total picture. Is it correct >> that at present the complete inventory of requirements at the airport >> entry point is as follows: >> >> * Conference Registration form >> * Visa Application form >> * Host Invitation letter (2 copies) >> * Signed approval letter from the State Migration Service >> * Flight and hotel information >> * Two colored photos (3x4cm, in white background) >> * Passport or stateless person’s identification card >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bill >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> FROM: "participant at igf2012.az" >>> >>> DATE: October 18, 2012 11:02:53 AM EDT >>> >>> TO: "william.drake" >>> >>> SUBJECT: НОВОЕ СООБЩЕНИЕ >>> >>> Dear Sir/Madam, >>> >>> Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your >>> full itinerary and accommodation information to us. >>> >>> Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Murad Maksudov > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Thu Oct 18 14:28:58 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:28:58 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> Message-ID: <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> Hi Norbert, On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 14:57:11 2012 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:57:11 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> Message-ID: Hi all, Yes, thanks for the clarification. I too was surprised at the headline and thought..."It's been at least 10 years that we've been talking about the need to do this..." My question is: Is the Banjul IXP project of any particular/strategic importance for AU or is it that they just happen to support this in partnership with ISOC? Speaking of which I shall be interested in finding out whether AU currently has any ICT/Internet Strategy of Plan and what it is. Thanks, Mawaki On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > Thanks for the clarification, David. > > I could not think that this would be the first IXP in Africa. So if it is an > IXP operators training - from where to set up more operations - that > clarifies the strategic role of the initiative set up in Banjul. > > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported here > by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the internationally > experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help the Banjul > efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC when new > IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. > > > Norbert Klein > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > = > > > On 10/18/2012 10:04 PM, David Conrad wrote: > > Hi, > > Just to clarify: there are quite a few IXes already up and operational in > Africa (e.g., see http://nsrc.org/AFRICA/ixp/). My understanding is that > the IXP in Gambia being referenced in the body of the article is in the > process of being developed (part of a joint project between the AU and ISOC) > and that the current effort is actually focused on training the IXP > operators. > > Regards, > -drc > > On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:38 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Updated: 2012-10-18 16:12 > ( Xinhua) > Comments(0) Print > Mail Large Medium Small 0 > > BANJUL - An African Union (AU) Internet expert said Wednesday that Africa > would establish its own Internet Exchange Point in Gambia to avoid costly > fees paid to overseas service providers. > > The African Union Commission had decided to finance the African Internet > exchange program, one of whose major projects was the Gambia exchange point, > Moses Bagingana said at the opening ceremony of a stakeholders' forum here > about ways to establish the site. > > He said Africa needed to find ways of optimizing Internet traffic in the > continent and boosting Internet connection with other continents. > > Bagingana said the Internet exchange program would encourage regional trade > integration, and create various opportunities for Africans. > > Gambian Minister of Communication Information and Infrastructure Nancy Nyang > said Gambia was attaching great importance to the program, noting Internet > broad band cables would be launched very soon to improve international > connectivity. > > AU leaders have adopted a declaration to strengthen national and regional > broad band infrastructure and build up the Gambia Internet exchange point. > > http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2012-10/18/content_15828459.htm > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From katycarvt at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 15:05:01 2012 From: katycarvt at gmail.com (Katy P) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:05:01 -0700 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm not telling anyone what to do here, but this seems questionable to me. On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Martial Bavou[Private Business Account] < bavouc at gmail.com> wrote: > Not sure I got this, but I trace and the source sound to be credible. **** > > ** ** > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Sarah Kiden > *Sent:* Thursday, October 18, 2012 3:47 PM > > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Subject:* [governance] IGF 2012**** > > ** ** > > Greetings, > > > I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see > below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. > Has anyone else received an email like this? > > Kind regards, > > Sarah **** > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *participant at igf2012.az* > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM > Subject: Новое сообщение > To: skiden > > **** > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your > full itinerary and accommodation information to us. > > Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. > > Best Regards, > > Murad Maksudov **** > > ** ** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nigidaad at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 15:11:29 2012 From: nigidaad at gmail.com (Nighat Dad) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:11:29 +0500 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I just got this... Dear Sir/Madam, The IGF Host Country Secretariat kindly requests you provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to participant at igf2012.az in order to arrange a smooth and free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival. This is to ensure that we cut long queues at the airport, and assign adequate transportation to our guests. Kindly distribute this request to friends and colleges that might be interested. Best Regards, IGF Host Country Secretariat Best, Nighat On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Martial Bavou[Private Business Account] wrote: > Not sure I got this, but I trace and the source sound to be credible. > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Sarah Kiden > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 3:47 PM > > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 > > > > Greetings, > > > > I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) > about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone > else received an email like this? > > Kind regards, > > Sarah > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: participant at igf2012.az > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM > Subject: Новое сообщение > To: skiden > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your > full itinerary and accommodation information to us. > > Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. > > Best Regards, > > Murad Maksudov > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From nigidaad at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 15:17:24 2012 From: nigidaad at gmail.com (Nighat Dad) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:17:24 +0500 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants In-Reply-To: <508051ba.88d50e0a.6930.ffffc895SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> References: <508051ba.88d50e0a.6930.ffffc895SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: Does anyone get the same email from IGF Host Country Secretariat? I received it just now. Best, Nighat ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:00 AM Subject: Free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants To: nigidaad Dear Sir/Madam, The IGF Host Country Secretariat kindly requests you provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to participant at igf2012.az in order to arrange a smooth and free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival. This is to ensure that we cut long queues at the airport, and assign adequate transportation to our guests. Kindly distribute this request to friends and colleges that might be interested. Best Regards, IGF Host Country Secretariat -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 15:20:16 2012 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:20:16 -0400 Subject: [governance] Fwd: Free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants In-Reply-To: References: <508051ba.88d50e0a.6930.ffffc895SMTPIN_ADDED@mx.google.com> Message-ID: I have, also just now -- and know of another person who also has. mawaki On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 3:17 PM, Nighat Dad wrote: > Does anyone get the same email from IGF Host Country Secretariat? I > received it just now. > > Best, > Nighat > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: participant at igf2012.az > Date: Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:00 AM > Subject: Free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants > To: nigidaad > > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > The IGF Host Country Secretariat kindly requests you provide your full > itinerary and accommodation information to participant at igf2012.az in > order to arrange a smooth and free pick up from the airport to hotels > on arrival. This is to ensure that we cut long queues at the airport, > and assign adequate transportation to our guests. > > Kindly distribute this request to friends and colleges that might be interested. > > Best Regards, > > IGF Host Country Secretariat > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From katycarvt at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 15:20:22 2012 From: katycarvt at gmail.com (Katy P) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 12:20:22 -0700 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I just got this as well. I didn't know about needing the state migration service letter. Just requested that. Argh. On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Nighat Dad wrote: > I just got this... > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > The IGF Host Country Secretariat kindly requests you provide your full > itinerary and accommodation information to participant at igf2012.az in > order to arrange a smooth and free pick up from the airport to hotels > on arrival. This is to ensure that we cut long queues at the airport, > and assign adequate transportation to our guests. > > Kindly distribute this request to friends and colleges that might be > interested. > > Best Regards, > > IGF Host Country Secretariat > > Best, > Nighat > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Martial Bavou[Private Business > Account] wrote: > > Not sure I got this, but I trace and the source sound to be credible. > > > > > > > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Sarah Kiden > > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 3:47 PM > > > > > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 > > > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > > > > > I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see > below) > > about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has > anyone > > else received an email like this? > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Sarah > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: participant at igf2012.az > > Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM > > Subject: Новое сообщение > > To: skiden > > > > Dear Sir/Madam, > > > > Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your > > full itinerary and accommodation information to us. > > > > Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Murad Maksudov > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Thu Oct 18 15:54:21 2012 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 21:54:21 +0200 Subject: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. In-Reply-To: <5E4C95E6-A05E-49C6-8EEB-A72569A9CF72@uzh.ch> References: <205f9732c5ce25f37a2c1b5dcfb28f9a@igf2012.az> <5E4C95E6-A05E-49C6-8EEB-A72569A9CF72@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <8329991125496343814@unknownmsgid> On a related subject, is there anywhere that it is clear what exactly you need to bring with you to get your visa, for the different countries? Some countries don't need visas in advance, some do - it isn't at all clear to me; perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place... -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton* Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 18 Oct 2012, at 21:10, William Drake wrote: from the MAG list... Begin forwarded message: *From: *nariman.hajiyev at igf2012.az *Date: *October 18, 2012 12:29:39 PM EDT *To: *William Drake *Cc: *MAG *Subject: **Re: Fwd: Новое сообщение* Dear Bill, Thanks for sorting out detailed required list of documents. Regarding the nature of this request, it is to arrange the pick up for the forum participants from the airport and ensure the proper planning of shuttle routes to the accommodation points. The only issue, causing the misunderstanding was that last email was sent not intentionally from the computer, which didn't allow to our staff finish the email, without subject and the reason of the email. Again, just to reconfirm, the reason of the latest unfinished email (request for flight details and hotels) just for the free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants, which we are used to make during the international events. Again sorry for that, and kindly ask you to disseminate this email around your friends. >From our side, the corrected email will be sent to all the attendees again, on behalf of the Secretariat. Best Regards, Nariman On 2012-10-18 20:34, William Drake wrote: Hello Coming on the heels of the passport number disclosure event, concerns have been expressed by some of the participants who have received the below message. I would greatly appreciate if the host country could clarify why flight and hotel information is being collected now, and whether there will be any further additions to the entry requirements in the days remaining. People are trying to piece together the total picture. Is it correct that at present the complete inventory of requirements at the airport entry point is as follows: * Conference Registration form * Visa Application form * Host Invitation letter (2 copies) * Signed approval letter from the State Migration Service * Flight and hotel information * Two colored photos (3x4cm, in white background) * Passport or stateless person's identification card Thanks, Bill Begin forwarded message: FROM: "participant at igf2012.az" DATE: October 18, 2012 11:02:53 AM EDT TO: "william.drake" SUBJECT: НОВОЕ СООБЩЕНИЕ Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Thu Oct 18 16:31:31 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:31:31 +0000 Subject: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. In-Reply-To: <8329991125496343814@unknownmsgid> References: <205f9732c5ce25f37a2c1b5dcfb28f9a@igf2012.az> <5E4C95E6-A05E-49C6-8EEB-A72569A9CF72@uzh.ch>,<8329991125496343814@unknownmsgid> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EEE343@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Nick, there are a few websites like http://www.visahq.com/citizens/ which collect visa requirements for all countries of origin and destination. The information is not authoritative, may change over time (quite suddenly over time), there may be requirements that are not published officially by countries and not caught in these sites, etc. Some require you to show travel tickets while others emphatically ask you not to buy them until you have the visa. And so on. You have to check in each case also because country of nationality, of birth, and of residence may make a difference for any given destination. A meatspace-Westphalia border gateway protocol that's hard to digest for Internet souls. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Nick Ashton-Hart [nashton at ccianet.org] Enviado el: jueves, 18 de octubre de 2012 14:54 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; William Drake Asunto: Re: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. On a related subject, is there anywhere that it is clear what exactly you need to bring with you to get your visa, for the different countries? Some countries don't need visas in advance, some do - it isn't at all clear to me; perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place... -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 18 Oct 2012, at 21:10, William Drake > wrote: from the MAG list… Begin forwarded message: From: nariman.hajiyev at igf2012.az Date: October 18, 2012 12:29:39 PM EDT To: William Drake > Cc: MAG > Subject: Re: Fwd: Новое сообщение Dear Bill, Thanks for sorting out detailed required list of documents. Regarding the nature of this request, it is to arrange the pick up for the forum participants from the airport and ensure the proper planning of shuttle routes to the accommodation points. The only issue, causing the misunderstanding was that last email was sent not intentionally from the computer, which didn’t allow to our staff finish the email, without subject and the reason of the email. Again, just to reconfirm, the reason of the latest unfinished email (request for flight details and hotels) just for the free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants, which we are used to make during the international events. Again sorry for that, and kindly ask you to disseminate this email around your friends. From our side, the corrected email will be sent to all the attendees again, on behalf of the Secretariat. Best Regards, Nariman On 2012-10-18 20:34, William Drake wrote: Hello Coming on the heels of the passport number disclosure event, concerns have been expressed by some of the participants who have received the below message. I would greatly appreciate if the host country could clarify why flight and hotel information is being collected now, and whether there will be any further additions to the entry requirements in the days remaining. People are trying to piece together the total picture. Is it correct that at present the complete inventory of requirements at the airport entry point is as follows: * Conference Registration form * Visa Application form * Host Invitation letter (2 copies) * Signed approval letter from the State Migration Service * Flight and hotel information * Two colored photos (3x4cm, in white background) * Passport or stateless person’s identification card Thanks, Bill Begin forwarded message: FROM: "participant at igf2012.az" > DATE: October 18, 2012 11:02:53 AM EDT TO: "william.drake" > SUBJECT: НОВОЕ СООБЩЕНИЕ Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Thu Oct 18 20:28:46 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:28:46 +1200 Subject: [governance] Council of Europe (CoE) Experts comments on gTLDs #Human Rights #Freedoms Message-ID: Dear All, If you have not had a chance to read the excellent write-up by: Mr Wolfgang Benedek, Professor for International Law and International Relations at the University of Graz, Austria (assisted by Paul Gragl and Matthias C.Kettemann) Ms Joy Liddicoat, Association for Progressive Communications, New Zealand Mr Nico van Eijk, Director of the Institute for Information Law at the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands I would recommend that people try and find time to read their analysis. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Thu Oct 18 20:46:30 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:46:30 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <507FA710.2020308@itforchange.net> References: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> <507FA710.2020308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Dear Parminder and all, I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, and worth a debate. While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we know, there are different situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have such round table and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. best, izumi 2012/10/18 parminder : > Dear Izumi, > > As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG > list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the > organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their > response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea > whether any clarification is provided on my comments > or not, you can make the case for that here. > > Best regards, parminder > > > On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear list, > > APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > > Comments welcome. > > izumi > > -------------- 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 From roland at internetpolicyagency.com Fri Oct 19 02:50:26 2012 From: roland at internetpolicyagency.com (Roland Perry) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 07:50:26 +0100 Subject: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EEE343@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <205f9732c5ce25f37a2c1b5dcfb28f9a@igf2012.az> <5E4C95E6-A05E-49C6-8EEB-A72569A9CF72@uzh.ch> <8329991125496343814@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EEE343@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: In message <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EEE343 at W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, at 20:31:31 on Thu, 18 Oct 2012, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch writes >there are a few websites like http://www.visahq.com/citizens/ which >collect visa requirements for all countries of origin and destination. > >The information is not authoritative, may change over time (quite >suddenly over time), there may be requirements that are not published >officially by countries and not caught in these sites, etc. The worst example I saw fairly recently (at the time of IGF) was one site's advice which only made sense if you believed Sharm el Sheikh was still in Israeli occupied Sinai. >Some require you to show travel tickets while others emphatically ask >you not to buy them until you have the visa. And so on.  Indeed; some countries want to see a hotel reservation and a ticket to prove you have the financial means support yourself and to leave the country afterwards, others don't want the aggravation caused if you book and are subsequently refused a visa. It's almost as two-edged as the WHOIS debate :) -- 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 From nashton at ccianet.org Fri Oct 19 03:27:41 2012 From: nashton at ccianet.org (Nick Ashton-Hart) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:27:41 +0200 Subject: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EEE343@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <205f9732c5ce25f37a2c1b5dcfb28f9a@igf2012.az> <5E4C95E6-A05E-49C6-8EEB-A72569A9CF72@uzh.ch> <8329991125496343814@unknownmsgid> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EEE343@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <-5182346335812088828@unknownmsgid> Dear Alex, Thanks - it turned out my issue was that on the iPad, using two different browsers, the visa info link on the IGF host website doesn't do anything. It does on the desktop though. (Cheers to those who replied with the direct link) -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton* Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 18 Oct 2012, at 22:27, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" wrote: Nick, there are a few websites like http://www.visahq.com/citizens/ which collect visa requirements for all countries of origin and destination. The information is not authoritative, may change over time (quite suddenly over time), there may be requirements that are not published officially by countries and not caught in these sites, etc. Some require you to show travel tickets while others emphatically ask you not to buy them until you have the visa. And so on. You have to check in each case also because country of nationality, of birth, and of residence may make a difference for any given destination. A meatspace-Westphalia border gateway protocol that's hard to digest for Internet souls. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ------------------------------ *Desde:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Nick Ashton-Hart [ nashton at ccianet.org] *Enviado el:* jueves, 18 de octubre de 2012 14:54 *Hasta:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; William Drake *Asunto:* Re: [governance] Baku visa requirements etc. On a related subject, is there anywhere that it is clear what exactly you need to bring with you to get your visa, for the different countries? Some countries don't need visas in advance, some do - it isn't at all clear to me; perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place... -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Geneva Representative Computer & Communications Industry Assocation (CCIA) Tel: +41 (22) 534 99 45 Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 79 595 5468 USA DID: +1 (202) 640-5430 *Need to meet with me? Schedule the time that suits us both here: http://meetme.so/nashton* Sent from my one of my handheld thingies, please excuse linguistic mangling. On 18 Oct 2012, at 21:10, William Drake wrote: from the MAG list… Begin forwarded message: *From: *nariman.hajiyev at igf2012.az *Date: *October 18, 2012 12:29:39 PM EDT *To: *William Drake *Cc: *MAG *Subject: **Re: Fwd: Новое сообщение* Dear Bill, Thanks for sorting out detailed required list of documents. Regarding the nature of this request, it is to arrange the pick up for the forum participants from the airport and ensure the proper planning of shuttle routes to the accommodation points. The only issue, causing the misunderstanding was that last email was sent not intentionally from the computer, which didn’t allow to our staff finish the email, without subject and the reason of the email. Again, just to reconfirm, the reason of the latest unfinished email (request for flight details and hotels) just for the free pick up from the airport to hotels on arrival of participants, which we are used to make during the international events. Again sorry for that, and kindly ask you to disseminate this email around your friends. >From our side, the corrected email will be sent to all the attendees again, on behalf of the Secretariat. Best Regards, Nariman On 2012-10-18 20:34, William Drake wrote: Hello Coming on the heels of the passport number disclosure event, concerns have been expressed by some of the participants who have received the below message. I would greatly appreciate if the host country could clarify why flight and hotel information is being collected now, and whether there will be any further additions to the entry requirements in the days remaining. People are trying to piece together the total picture. Is it correct that at present the complete inventory of requirements at the airport entry point is as follows: * Conference Registration form * Visa Application form * Host Invitation letter (2 copies) * Signed approval letter from the State Migration Service * Flight and hotel information * Two colored photos (3x4cm, in white background) * Passport or stateless person’s identification card Thanks, Bill Begin forwarded message: FROM: "participant at igf2012.az" DATE: October 18, 2012 11:02:53 AM EDT TO: "william.drake" SUBJECT: НОВОЕ СООБЩЕНИЕ Dear Sir/Madam, Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide your full itinerary and accommodation information to us. Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku. Best Regards, Murad Maksudov ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From Stuart.Hamilton at ifla.org Fri Oct 19 03:31:35 2012 From: Stuart.Hamilton at ifla.org (Stuart Hamilton) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:31:35 +0200 Subject: [governance] Librarise and Beyond Access in Washington DC Message-ID: <54A34818249DE34CB1697E94F0553F3701E599CF@mfp01.IFLA.lan> Dear Colleagues Ahead of the forthcoming Internet Governance Forum (IGF) in Baku, Azerbaijan where IFLA, Electronic Information for Libraries (EIFL) and the Internet Society (ISOC) have arranged a workshop (number 130) on libraries and public access, I would like to a share with you a quick report from this month's major conference on libraries and development in Washington DC. The Beyond Access conference, which featured IFLA as an organising partner along with several other library organisations (http://www.beyondaccess.net/beyond-access-members/), bought together librarians, policymakers and funders to look at the ways that public libraries can deliver information and advance development. A short report is available here on the IREX website: http://www.irex.org/news/usaid-administrator-irex-and-partners-point-lib raries-change-lives?utm_source=IREX+Get+Updates&utm_campaign=51039be703- Beyond_Access_Recap10_18_2012&utm_medium=email In the coming week we will make an announcement regarding the IGF workshop that will contain details of how you can follow it online, and participate remotely. The IGF will also see the first meeting of the Dynamic Coalition on Public Access in Libraries. You can find more information on this here: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/component/content/article/114-preparatory -process/1003-dynamic-coalition-on-public-libraries Please share this information with interested colleagues, and I look forward to your participation (remotely or onsite) in our workshop in Baku. Kind regards, Stuart Stuart Hamilton Director of Policy and Advocacy International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) P.O. Box 95312 2509 CH The Hague Netherlands 00 31 70 314 0884 Twitter: @iflaspa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Fri Oct 19 03:36:36 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 09:36:36 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> Dear members of the list The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step in this direction. But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and consequently bandwidth waste on international routes. Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting network(s). Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation but the (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. Best regards Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 18/10/12 21:10 > De : "David Conrad" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Hi Norbert, > > On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. > > My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. > > Regards, > -drc > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 05:10:28 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:10:28 +0600 Subject: [governance] FW: [Internet Policy] EU/EP/S&D - Copyright & the Internet In-Reply-To: <50808C08.2080303@isoc.nl> References: <50808C08.2080303@isoc.nl> Message-ID: <024601cdadd9$b387c3a0$1a974ae0$@gmail.com> Hmmm... not much useful direction from that quarter... M -----Original Message----- From: internetpolicy-bounces at elists.isoc.org [mailto:internetpolicy-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of Dick Kalkman Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 5:09 AM To: InternetPolicy at elists.isoc.org Subject: [Internet Policy] EU/EP/S&D - Copyright & the Internet Dear all, After the Thursday S&D Group debate, the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats in the European Parliament (S&D) has made a press release on Copyright & the Internet. http://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/gpes/public/detail.htm?id=137432&reques t_locale=EN§ion=NER&category=NEWS Best regards, Dick Kalkman President Internet Society The Netherlands ISOC Netherlands Chapter E: d.h.kalkman at isoc.nl I: http://isoc.nl A: Prins Willem-Alexanderhof 5 Kamer i4.310 2595 BE Den Haag The Netherlands _______________________________________________ To manage your ISOC subscriptions or unsubscribe, please log into the ISOC Member Portal: https://portal.isoc.org/ Then choose Interests & Subscriptions from the My Account menu. -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 06:32:31 2012 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 06:32:31 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> Message-ID: Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP in Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes into account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long term progress. In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge place where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long term advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, where policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best practices, and then try to win over policy-makers to it. A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and sharing information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift the power dynamics. Best, Mawaki otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only Association for Progressive Communications :) On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > > > Dear members of the list > > > > The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are around > thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and spatial > distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step in this > direction. > > > > But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional and > continental level. In most cases there are a more or less continuous series > of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a consistent, survivable > network. This strongly limits the very functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, > routing and thereby maintaining IP traffic that is exchanged in specific > spaces (country, sub-region, part of African continent) in their respective > limits, saving high costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes > and consequently bandwidth waste on international routes. > > > > Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit > seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting > network(s). > > > > Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation but the > (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take too > much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this mismanagement is > mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard competition instead of > genuine networking, but also the African Union and the ITU, despite the n°1 > and 2 of which are Africans. > > > > Best regards > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > >> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >> De : "David Conrad" >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Copie à : >> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> Hi Norbert, > >> >> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >> > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported >> > here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the >> > internationally experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help >> > the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC >> > when new IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. >> >> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC partnering >> with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is technology neutral. I'm >> told by one of the folks involved in Gambia that they expect the IXP to be >> set up in 6 months or so. As far as I know, there hasn't been any decision >> on hardware in the IXP. >> >> Regards, >> -drc >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From divina.meigs at orange.fr Fri Oct 19 08:03:38 2012 From: divina.meigs at orange.fr (Divina MEIGS) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:03:38 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1446790732.15637.1350648218935.JavaMail.www@wwinf1j09> + 1  divina  > Message du 18/10/12 17:22 > De : "Presidencia Internauta" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jacqueline Morris" > Copie à : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > Objet : Re: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] > > > +1 > --  > Sergio Salinas Porto > Presidente Internauta Argentina > Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet/CTA > FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet > facebook:salinasporto > twitter:sergiosalinas > MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... > Skype:internautaargentina > Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819 > 2012/10/18 Jacqueline Morris > > +1 On Oct 18, 2012 2:31 AM, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" wrote: +1! > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro wrote: > I agree Izumi. +1 > What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to show that you don't support the Proposal). > Kind Regards > > On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > > Comments welcome. > > izumi > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From:   > Date: 2012/10/12 > Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > To: igf_members at intgovforum.org > > > Dear Colleaques, > > We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. > > Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider it. > > Best regards > Alice > > ------------------------------ > > HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE > IGF 2012 > > Background > > During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways to > develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were > proposed. Particularly,  the group in charge of structuring the Taking > Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of the > session includes feedback from the cross-cutting > > themes which could be developed through round tables. It was supported by > other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. > > Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, that > approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance Forum > make specific reference to human rights related issues, including privacy, > freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet > intermediary liability. > > Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need for > transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing consumer > complaints.  Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this area. > > Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, > including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. There > are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and youth, as > well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. > > Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many of the > workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions on > freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet intermediaries. > > Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop proposals, > particularly with respect to determining best practices and frameworks. > > Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, would > like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which look > at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the various > main sessions and workshops. > > > Objective > > The objective of the human rights round table is to gather comprehensive > feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to which > human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to use > those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session.  It > will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human rights > and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various stakeholders > have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of the > internet governance debate.  It will also help to increase understanding > of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main > sessions and the main IGF theme. > > Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary > liability, cybercrime, among others. > > Format > > The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in which > speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and > workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the TSWF > session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji > Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >   > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From bekele at isoc.org Fri Oct 19 09:07:42 2012 From: bekele at isoc.org (Dawit Bekele) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 16:07:42 +0300 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> Message-ID: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Hi all, As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready yet). The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders invited at the workshops on the way forward. As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops in the coming two months: Namibia 23 - 25 October Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 Niger 6-8 November Benin 13-15 November Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE (attached description). Best regards, Dawit Bekele Director, African Regional Bureau Internet Society > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK > Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP in > Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about > any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes into > account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long term > progress. > > In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a > "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge place > where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? > Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and > strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" > which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long term > advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, where > policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best practices, > and then try to win over policy-makers to it. > > A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any > incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative > destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. > Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and sharing > information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift the > power dynamics. > > Best, > > Mawaki > otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only > Association for Progressive Communications :) > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > wrote: > > > > > > Dear members of the list > > > > > > > > The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are > > around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and > > spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step > > in this direction. > > > > > > > > But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional > > and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less > > continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a > > consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very > > functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining > > IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, > > part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high > > costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and consequently > bandwidth waste on international routes. > > > > > > > > Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit > > seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting > > network(s). > > > > > > > > Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation > > but the > > (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take > > too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this > > mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard > > competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union > > and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > > > > >> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 > >> De : "David Conrad" > >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > >> Copie à : > >> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > >> > >> Hi Norbert, > > > >> > >> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > >> > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is > >> > reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication > >> > that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier > >> > Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained > >> > with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places > in Africa. > >> > >> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC > >> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is > >> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia > >> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I > >> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. > >> > >> Regards, > >> -drc > >> > >> > >> > __________________________________________________________ > __ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > __ > > 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 -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AXIS Project 082312.doc Type: application/msword Size: 40960 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: The African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge Economy-1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 23040 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 19 09:34:43 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 06:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <1350653683.74104.YahooMailNeo@web120101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Very many thanks, Dawit. I recall one sleepless night drafting the ARAPKE.  Because I also am in the Cote d'Ivoire IXP working group, I could tell this was a media rendition of the meeting. Thanks for the clear explanation and  specifically for highlighting country-specific realities. Lately I have had to engage several IXP managers - In Cameroon, Nigeria, Tanzania.  Every story is different.  In Côte d'Ivoire, ours will end up as a state law.  The bill has already been drafted.. hopefully, we will all be "obliged" Long life to AXIS Best N   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Dawit Bekele To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; 'Mawaki Chango' Cc: Moses Bayingana Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:07 PM Subject: RE: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Hi all, As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready yet). The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders invited at the workshops on the way forward. As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take.  We organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops in the coming two months: Namibia    23 - 25 October Guinea        30 Oct- Nov 1 Niger                    6-8 November Benin        13-15 November Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT development plan for  Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE (attached description). Best regards, Dawit Bekele Director, African Regional Bureau Internet Society > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK > Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP in > Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about > any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes into > account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long term > progress. > > In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a > "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge place > where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? > Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and > strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" > which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long term > advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, where > policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best practices, > and then try to win over policy-makers to it. > > A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any > incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative > destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. > Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and sharing > information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift the > power dynamics. > > Best, > > Mawaki > otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only > Association for Progressive Communications :) > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > wrote: > > > > > > Dear members of the list > > > > > > > > The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are > > around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and > > spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step > > in this direction. > > > > > > > > But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional > > and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less > > continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a > > consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very > > functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining > > IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, > > part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high > > costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and consequently > bandwidth waste on international routes. > > > > > > > > Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit > > seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting > > network(s). > > > > > > > > Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation > > but the > > (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take > > too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this > > mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard > > competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union > > and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. > > > > > > > > Best regards > > > > > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > > > > >> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 > >> De : "David Conrad" > >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > >> Copie à : > >> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > >> > >> Hi Norbert, > > > >> > >> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > >> > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is > >> > reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication > >> > that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier > >> > Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained > >> > with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places > in Africa. > >> > >> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC > >> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is > >> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia > >> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I > >> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. > >> > >> Regards, > >> -drc > >> > >> > >> > __________________________________________________________ > __ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ > __ > > 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 > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From f.massit at orange.fr Fri Oct 19 09:51:09 2012 From: f.massit at orange.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?fran=E7oise?=) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:51:09 +0200 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <0ED5884B-B302-43B7-A661-FBD00D8F5C38@orange.fr> Nice to get news from your side ! Hope you remember our seminar in Bordeaux ... Best thoughts, Françoise Françoise Massit-Folléa f.massit at orange.fr Mob. 06 74 51 67 65 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From f.massit at orange.fr Fri Oct 19 09:51:54 2012 From: f.massit at orange.fr (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?fran=E7oise?=) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 15:51:54 +0200 Subject: [governance] apology In-Reply-To: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <7F207074-97E3-46EF-8313-C13F2390B199@orange.fr> for misdirecting a private answer Françoise Massit-Folléa f.massit at orange.fr Mob. 06 74 51 67 65 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From kichango at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 14:08:07 2012 From: kichango at gmail.com (Mawaki Chango) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 14:08:07 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my questions. Mawaki On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: > Hi all, > > As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System > (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would > like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS > project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims > at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the > project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African > countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these > same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African > Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have > attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready > yet). > > The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting > up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took > off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss > about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in > Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops > have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders > invited at the workshops on the way forward. > > As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country > follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the > African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We > organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina > Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops > in the coming two months: > > Namibia 23 - 25 October > Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 > Niger 6-8 November > Benin 13-15 November > > Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear > plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to > that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. > > Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT > development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge > Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE > (attached description). > > Best regards, > Dawit Bekele > Director, African Regional Bureau > Internet Society > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP > in >> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes > into >> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long > term >> progress. >> >> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge > place >> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long > term >> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, > where >> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best > practices, >> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >> >> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and > sharing >> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift > the >> power dynamics. >> >> Best, >> >> Mawaki >> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >> Association for Progressive Communications :) >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Dear members of the list >> > >> > >> > >> > The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >> > around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >> > spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >> > in this direction. >> > >> > >> > >> > But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >> > and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >> > continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >> > consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >> > functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >> > IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >> > part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >> > costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and > consequently >> bandwidth waste on international routes. >> > >> > >> > >> > Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >> > seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >> > network(s). >> > >> > >> > >> > Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >> > but the >> > (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >> > too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >> > mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >> > competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >> > and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >> > >> > >> > >> > Best regards >> > >> > >> > >> > Jean-Louis Fullsack >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >> >> De : "David Conrad" >> >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> >> Copie à : >> >> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> >> >> Hi Norbert, >> > >> >> >> >> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >> >> > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >> >> > reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >> >> > that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >> >> > Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >> >> > with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more > places >> in Africa. >> >> >> >> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >> >> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >> >> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >> >> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >> >> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> -drc >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________ >> __ >> >> 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 >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> __________________________________________________________ >> __ >> > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 14:49:05 2012 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 13:49:05 -0500 Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack Message-ID: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-banks-under-cyber-attack-iran-money-safe-151123675.html Is this a response to Stuxnet? or is this the beginning of a cyberwar? -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 14:27:56 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:27:56 +0300 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <50819BAC.70800@gmail.com> Would it be possible to get insight into what sort of resource sharing or linking are being pursued besides the workshops? There is a lot to be learned from the voluntary but cooperative nature of CIR bodies in the US. What do you think useful avenues could be pursued (for eg UNCTAD recommended that poor countries regulate the building of tower masts to improve coverage and reduce the duplication of capital investment by private operators - who had little interest in this). And is there an assessment of the skills set shortage? Riaz On 2012/10/19 04:07 PM, Dawit Bekele wrote: > Hi all, > > As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System > (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would > like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS > project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims > at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the > project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African > countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these > same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African > Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have > attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready > yet). > > The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting > up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took > off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss > about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in > Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops > have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders > invited at the workshops on the way forward. > > As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country > follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the > African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We > organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina > Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops > in the coming two months: > > Namibia 23 - 25 October > Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 > Niger 6-8 November > Benin 13-15 November > > Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear > plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to > that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. > > Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT > development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge > Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE > (attached description). > > Best regards, > Dawit Bekele > Director, African Regional Bureau > Internet Society > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP > in >> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes > into >> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long > term >> progress. >> >> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge > place >> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long > term >> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, > where >> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best > practices, >> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >> >> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and > sharing >> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift > the >> power dynamics. >> >> Best, >> >> Mawaki >> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >> Association for Progressive Communications :) >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > >> wrote: >>> >>> Dear members of the list >>> >>> >>> >>> The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>> around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>> spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>> in this direction. >>> >>> >>> >>> But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>> and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>> continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>> consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>> functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>> IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>> part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>> costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and > consequently >> bandwidth waste on international routes. >>> >>> >>> Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>> seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>> network(s). >>> >>> >>> >>> Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>> but the >>> (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>> too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>> mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>> competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>> and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>> >>> >>> >>> Best regards >>> >>> >>> >>> Jean-Louis Fullsack >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>> De : "David Conrad" >>>> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> Copie à : >>>> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>> >>>> Hi Norbert, >>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>> I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>> reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>> that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>> Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>> with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more > places >> in Africa. >>>> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> -drc >>>> >>>> >>>> >> __________________________________________________________ >> __ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >> __________________________________________________________ >> __ >>> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 15:58:39 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 07:58:39 +1200 Subject: [governance] Access for Disabled Persons - [Access for All] Message-ID: Dear All, People take using the Internet for granted and we have persons in our community who despite extraordinary challenges go to great lengths to access the internet. One of the things that saddens me is how it continues to remain an area least prioritised as far as Freedom of Expression goes. Even when the UN Special Rapporteur Frank La Rue wrote about his , Report on Freedom of Expression in relation to the Internet, Access for Disabled Persons was relegated to the last paragraph in what I thought was a "By the way...off handed comment", at least in my reading of the same. Whilst there is a United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities on this area, see: http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150 , there are 154 countries that have signed up and only 125 have ratified, you can check to see which countries have ratified by going to the link. *Accessibility* I know that the Australian Government have through various initiatives made ICT accessible for disabled persons as has been reported to the community from Gunela Astbrink, there is still a lot of room for improvement. This includes things like handsets that can be easily used by those who are visually challenged. I will never forget sitting in a CommunicAsia meeting in Singapore and hearing Skype CEO back then talk about how Skype had revolutionised communication. *Website Accessibility* * * Last year at the PACINET in American Samoa in a session organised by Gunela Astbrink from ISOC Australia,in an extraordinary advocate who has been pushing access for disabled persons for many years in Australia, within the region and internationally, Faaolo Utumapu from Samoa demonstrated how her screen reading software with speech synthesis works and how she can navigate through accessible websites. She also demonstrated how barriers are placed in front of her when websites are not accessible. For websites to be able to be completely accessible, there are various standards developed to help cater for these. A good resource site is: http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-WCAG-EM-20120920/ *Hungary Proposal to the WCIT [8b on Access for Disabled Persons]* Whilst there are Resolutions in place from the Plenipotentiaries which resulted in the creation of a Fund, it was reported to the Caribbean WCIT Preparation that only Cyprus had contributed to the same. There is a proposal by Hungary to add 8(b) and it includes excellent Access provisions for disabled persons and countries should support Hungary's Proposal. Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Fri Oct 19 22:33:30 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 08:03:30 +0530 Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The war's been on for years now. (with an unseen/unrecognizable enemy) Actually with today's fast moving world, time is a more critical commodity. I'll take spam as an example. If it's possible to have people spend 10 minutes more checking spam, or make people check their email less often due to the vast amount of spam in it, the attack has claimed a victim. The implications are pretty significant - it may just be 10 minutes per person - but weekly it adds up to almost an hour of active email checking/deleting - plus the risk of a worm/virus coming in with the message. For an organization with 1000 people it's 1000 man hours per week wasted - which costs a fortune. In defence projects and suchlike inspite of safety measures if one worm gets into the facility it can waste even 10 times more time than that (because nobody wants a worm crawling around on their network). Yes money is important - but with other victims easier to take like time, social media account information (because most are fairly careful with their bank details now-a-days) - it's still fairly easy to make a strike. Just IMHO, for the consumer/customer I'd rank time > virus-threat > password theft, and given 90% people already check the security certificate (or look for the 'green bar' on FF) I'd say financial theft is slightly less likely, and most consumers would not care too much as long as there's no theft. Most think SSL is bulletproof!! They trust the banks (and their security) implicitly. For financials it's usually to get an alternative if the online banking service is offline - like phonebanking or sms banking - or pop down to an ATM and check the cash... Not as much of a threat as long as there's no data theft (which, TBH, the banks are doing a good job of keeping safe). -C On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Devon Blake wrote: > > http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-banks-under-cyber-attack-iran-money-safe-151123675.html > Is this a response to Stuxnet? or is this the beginning of a cyberwar? > > -- > Devon Blake > Special Projects Director > Earthwise Solutions Limited > 29 Dominica Drive > Kgn 5 > ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 > > To be kind, To be helpful, To network > *Earthwise ... For Life!* > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From siliconvalley2005 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 20 00:17:10 2012 From: siliconvalley2005 at yahoo.com (annan ebenezer) Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 21:17:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <1350706630.14337.YahooMailNeo@web122905.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> HI ,the implementation  of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System(AXIS) is in the right direction. Systems and internet infrastructure thatbenefit our common  aspiration are of great interest. we request that those with expertness  in the field work with government ,civil society and take inputs from other stakeholder bodies like the Academia etc,  in designing  technologies that respond  with time. IXP points have positive effecton our economies in terms of  cost of doing business among ourselves in the integration process and the larger world. Since it  also creates a certain political clout as a part of  what I call ‘the larger Pan African project, all  effort should be  made to explains its geopolitical ,social and economic dimensions to the ordinary  citizenry. As a continent, we still have reminders of  lack of the political will among our countries or is it that our experts have not,as yet worked hard to curtailed the fact that most of  calls have to be  routed to the  the Americas and Europe before reaching  its destination in Africa. We currently have the advantage asthe head of the ITU body in breaking down neoliberal policies thathave over the years hindered our freedomin its entirety. Independence isnot only in political freedom from our colonial masters but a full suite that needed to be exhausted. ebenezer Annang http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=28952112&trk=tab_pro   ________________________________ From: Mawaki Chango To: Dawit Bekele Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Moses Bayingana Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 7:08 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my questions. Mawaki On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: > Hi all, > > As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System > (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would > like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS > project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims > at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the > project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African > countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these > same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African > Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have > attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready > yet). > > The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting > up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took > off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss > about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in > Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops > have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders > invited at the workshops on the way forward. > > As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country > follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the > African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take.  We > organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina > Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops > in the coming two months: > > Namibia 23 - 25 October > Guinea          30 Oct- Nov 1 > Niger                    6-8 November > Benin          13-15 November > > Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear > plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to > that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. > > Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT > development plan for  Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge > Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE > (attached description). > > Best regards, > Dawit Bekele > Director, African Regional Bureau > Internet Society > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP > in >> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes > into >> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long > term >> progress. >> >> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge > place >> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long > term >> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, > where >> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best > practices, >> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >> >> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and > sharing >> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift > the >> power dynamics. >> >> Best, >> >> Mawaki >> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >> Association for Progressive Communications :) >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Dear members of the list >> > >> > >> > >> > The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >> > around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >> > spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >> > in this direction. >> > >> > >> > >> > But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >> > and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >> > continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >> > consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >> > functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >> > IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >> > part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >> > costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and > consequently >> bandwidth waste on international routes. >> > >> > >> > >> > Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >> > seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >> > network(s). >> > >> > >> > >> > Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >> > but the >> > (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >> > too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >> > mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >> > competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >> > and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >> > >> > >> > >> > Best regards >> > >> > >> > >> > Jean-Louis Fullsack >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >> >> De : "David Conrad" >> >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> >> Copie à : >> >> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> >> >> Hi Norbert, >> > >> >> >> >> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >> >> > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >> >> > reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >> >> > that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >> >> > Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >> >> > with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more > places >> in Africa. >> >> >> >> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >> >> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >> >> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >> >> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >> >> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> -drc >> >> >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________________________________ >> __ >> >> 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 >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> __________________________________________________________ >> __ >> > 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Sat Oct 20 06:51:02 2012 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 15:51:02 +0500 Subject: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express your views] In-Reply-To: <1446790732.15637.1350648218935.JavaMail.www@wwinf1j09> References: <1446790732.15637.1350648218935.JavaMail.www@wwinf1j09> Message-ID: +1 and I've supported the same elsewhere. -- Regards. -------------------------- Fouad Bajwa ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/ Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 5:03 PM, Divina MEIGS wrote: > + 1 > > divina > > > > > >> Message du 18/10/12 17:22 >> De : "Presidencia Internauta" >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jacqueline Morris" >> Copie à : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" >> Objet : Re: [governance] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable [Please express >> your views] > >> >> >> +1 > > >> > -- >> > > Sergio Salinas Porto >> Presidente Internauta Argentina >> Asociación Argentina de Usuarios de Internet/CTA >> FLUI- Federación Latinoamericana de Usuarios de Internet >> facebook:salinasporto >> twitter:sergiosalinas >> MSN/MSN YAHOO/Talk: salinasporto... >> Skype:internautaargentina >> Mobi:+54 9 223 5 215819 > > >> > 2012/10/18 Jacqueline Morris >> >> >> > +1 >> >> On Oct 18, 2012 2:31 AM, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" >> wrote: >>> >>> +1! >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro >>> wrote: >>> > >>>> >>>> I agree Izumi. +1 >>>> >>>> > >>>> What do others think. Please indicate. (+1 to show support) and (-1 to >>>> show that you don't support the Proposal). >>>> >>>> > >>>> Kind Regards >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>> > >>>>> >>>>> Dear list, >>>>> > >>>>> > APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >>>>> > >>>>> > Comments welcome. >>>>> > >>>>> > izumi >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>>>> > From: >>>>> > Date: 2012/10/12 >>>>> > Subject: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable >>>>> > To: igf_members at intgovforum.org >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Dear Colleaques, >>>>> > >>>>> > We wish to submit this proposal for a Human Rights round Table. >>>>> > >>>>> > Apologies for submitting it a bit late, but hope you will consider >>>>> > it. >>>>> > >>>>> > Best regards >>>>> > Alice >>>>> > >>>>> > ------------------------------ >>>>> > >>>>> > HUMAN RIGHTS ROUNDTABLE >>>>> > IGF 2012 >>>>> > >>>>> > Background >>>>> > >>>>> > During the IGF MAG meeting held in May 2012 in Geneva, several ways >>>>> > to >>>>> > develop the cross-cutting issues (human rights and development) were >>>>> > proposed. Particularly, the group in charge of structuring the >>>>> > Taking >>>>> > Stock and the Way Forward session suggested that the second part of >>>>> > the >>>>> > session includes feedback from the cross-cutting >>>>> > >>>>> > themes which could be developed through round tables. It was >>>>> > supported by >>>>> > other MAG members (see transcripts MAG meeting 17 May)[1]. >>>>> > >>>>> > Additionally, it is important to mention as a background element, >>>>> > that >>>>> > approximately 40 workshop proposals for the 2012 Internet Governance >>>>> > Forum >>>>> > make specific reference to human rights related issues, including >>>>> > privacy, >>>>> > freedom of expression, data rights, cyber security, and internet >>>>> > intermediary liability. >>>>> > >>>>> > Consumer rights are a growing area of interest, including the need >>>>> > for >>>>> > transparency, regulatory oversight, and mechanisms for addressing >>>>> > consumer >>>>> > complaints. Data ownership and privacy are major issues in this >>>>> > area. >>>>> > >>>>> > Human rights in relation to security is a major theme for the IGF, >>>>> > including cybercrime, and the tension between privacy and security. >>>>> > There >>>>> > are several proposed workshops on the protection of children and >>>>> > youth, as >>>>> > well as practical workshops on surveillance and data protection. >>>>> > >>>>> > Developing best practices and legal frameworks is discussed in many >>>>> > of the >>>>> > workshop proposals, particularly in light of increasing restrictions >>>>> > on >>>>> > freedom of expression, and new liabilities for internet >>>>> > intermediaries. >>>>> > >>>>> > Multi-stakeholderism is a cross-cutting theme in the workshop >>>>> > proposals, >>>>> > particularly with respect to determining best practices and >>>>> > frameworks. >>>>> > >>>>> > Based on it, Kenya, in partnership with APC, Finland and Sweden, >>>>> > would >>>>> > like to propose the organisation of a human rights round table which >>>>> > look >>>>> > at how HR issues related to the internet were addressed in the >>>>> > various >>>>> > main sessions and workshops. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > Objective >>>>> > >>>>> > The objective of the human rights round table is to gather >>>>> > comprehensive >>>>> > feedback from the various main sessions and workshops in relation to >>>>> > which >>>>> > human rights issues were addressed by the various stakeholders and to >>>>> > use >>>>> > those inputs to feed the Taking Stock and the Way Forward session. >>>>> > It >>>>> > will help us to increase knowledge and understanding of the human >>>>> > rights >>>>> > and the internet specific concerns and challenges the various >>>>> > stakeholders >>>>> > have as well as their proposals to address them in the framework of >>>>> > the >>>>> > internet governance debate. It will also help to increase >>>>> > understanding >>>>> > of the linkages between the HR issues addressed in the various main >>>>> > sessions and the main IGF theme. >>>>> > >>>>> > Themes in analysis will include privacy, censorship, intermediary >>>>> > liability, cybercrime, among others. >>>>> > >>>>> > Format >>>>> > >>>>> > The round table will be held in a multi-stakeholder environment in >>>>> > which >>>>> > speakers/participants who took part of the various main sessions and >>>>> > workshops bring their perspectives in a concrete manner to feed the >>>>> > TSWF >>>>> > session and propose ways to advance the HR discussion within the IGF. >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> > 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 >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> -- >>>> > >>>> Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala >>>> P.O. Box 17862 >>>> Suva >>>> Fiji >>>> >>>> > >>>> Twitter: @SalanietaT >>>> Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro >>>> Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>>> > 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 >>>> > >>>> > >>> >>> >>> > >>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >> >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> > > > >> >> > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Oct 20 07:20:13 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 16:50:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] Fwd: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: References: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> <507FA710.2020308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <508288ED.9030208@itforchange.net> Dear Izumi/ All I suggest that we request the organiser of the human rights round table to (1) include social, economic and cultural rights in the background note and the discussions (if specific instances of such rights are needed we can mention, right to access/use the Internet, net neutrality - or the right to have the information, communication or content contributed by any one to the Internet equally as any other, linguistic and other cultural rights vis a vis the domain name system and so on). Also mention indivisibility of human rights as the WSIS documents do. (2) Not to foreground consumer rights in a human rights write up. Preferably not to mention it al all, for consumer rights are not human rights. Certainly not in UN usage. Thanks and best, parminder On Friday 19 October 2012 06:16 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear Parminder and all, > > I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. > > Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, > and worth a debate. > > While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not > have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we > know, there are different > situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access > to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have > such round table > and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. > > best, > > izumi > > 2012/10/18 parminder : >> Dear Izumi, >> >> As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG >> list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the >> organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their >> response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea >> whether any clarification is provided on my comments >> or not, you can make the case for that here. >> >> Best regards, parminder >> >> >> On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> Dear list, >> >> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> izumi >> >> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Oct 20 07:35:22 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 +0530 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. parminder On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my > questions. > > Mawaki > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System >> (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would >> like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS >> project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims >> at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the >> project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African >> countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these >> same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African >> Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have >> attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready >> yet). >> >> The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting >> up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took >> off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss >> about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in >> Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops >> have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders >> invited at the workshops on the way forward. >> >> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country >> follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the >> African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We >> organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina >> Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops >> in the coming two months: >> >> Namibia 23 - 25 October >> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >> Niger 6-8 November >> Benin 13-15 November >> >> Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear >> plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to >> that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. >> >> Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT >> development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge >> Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE >> (attached description). >> >> Best regards, >> Dawit Bekele >> Director, African Regional Bureau >> Internet Society >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >>> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>> >>> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP >> in >>> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >>> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes >> into >>> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long >> term >>> progress. >>> >>> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >>> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge >> place >>> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >>> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >>> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >>> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long >> term >>> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, >> where >>> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best >> practices, >>> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >>> >>> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >>> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >>> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >>> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and >> sharing >>> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift >> the >>> power dynamics. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Mawaki >>> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >>> Association for Progressive Communications :) >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK >> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear members of the list >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>>> around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>>> spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>>> in this direction. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>>> and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>>> continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>>> consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>>> functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>>> IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>>> part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>>> costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and >> consequently >>> bandwidth waste on international routes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>>> seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>>> network(s). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>>> but the >>>> (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>>> too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>>> mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>>> competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>>> and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jean-Louis Fullsack >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>>> De : "David Conrad" >>>>> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>> Copie à : >>>>> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>>> >>>>> Hi Norbert, >>>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>>> I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>>> reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>>> that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>>> Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>>> with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more >> places >>> in Africa. >>>>> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>>> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>>> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>>> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>>> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> -drc >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> __ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> __ >>>> 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sat Oct 20 08:11:23 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Alejandro Pisanty) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 12:11:23 +0000 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> Parminder, Market power and large asymmetries in traffic are indeed a serious factor in this. Lots of good bilateral agreements between ISPs and good engineering go far in optimizing traffic in absence of an IXP. Forcing interconnection by law or government action seems tempting but bites back hard; need to collect case studies for further analysis. Are you talking to ISPs close by or do you have a study for India? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -----Original Message----- From: parminder Sender: Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 To: Reply-To: , parminder Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. parminder On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my > questions. > > Mawaki > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System >> (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would >> like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS >> project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims >> at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the >> project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African >> countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these >> same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African >> Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have >> attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready >> yet). >> >> The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting >> up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took >> off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss >> about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in >> Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops >> have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders >> invited at the workshops on the way forward. >> >> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country >> follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the >> African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We >> organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina >> Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops >> in the coming two months: >> >> Namibia 23 - 25 October >> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >> Niger 6-8 November >> Benin 13-15 November >> >> Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear >> plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to >> that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. >> >> Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT >> development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge >> Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE >> (attached description). >> >> Best regards, >> Dawit Bekele >> Director, African Regional Bureau >> Internet Society >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >>> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>> >>> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP >> in >>> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >>> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes >> into >>> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long >> term >>> progress. >>> >>> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >>> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge >> place >>> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >>> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >>> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >>> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long >> term >>> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, >> where >>> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best >> practices, >>> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >>> >>> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >>> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >>> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >>> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and >> sharing >>> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift >> the >>> power dynamics. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Mawaki >>> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >>> Association for Progressive Communications :) >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK >> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear members of the list >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>>> around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>>> spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>>> in this direction. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>>> and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>>> continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>>> consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>>> functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>>> IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>>> part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>>> costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and >> consequently >>> bandwidth waste on international routes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>>> seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>>> network(s). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>>> but the >>>> (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>>> too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>>> mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>>> competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>>> and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jean-Louis Fullsack >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>>> De : "David Conrad" >>>>> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>> Copie à : >>>>> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>>> >>>>> Hi Norbert, >>>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>>> I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>>> reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>>> that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>>> Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>>> with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more >> places >>> in Africa. >>>>> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>>> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>>> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>>> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>>> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> -drc >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> __ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> __ >>>> 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Sat Oct 20 08:12:21 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Alejandro Pisanty) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 12:12:21 +0000 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-848786940-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> Parminder, Market power and large asymmetries in traffic are indeed a serious factor in this. Lots of good bilateral agreements between ISPs and good engineering go far in optimizing traffic in absence of an IXP. Forcing interconnection by law or government action seems tempting but bites back hard; need to collect case studies for further analysis. Are you talking to ISPs close by or do you have a study for India? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -----Original Message----- From: parminder Sender: Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 To: Reply-To: , parminder Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. parminder On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: > Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my > questions. > > Mawaki > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System >> (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would >> like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS >> project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims >> at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the >> project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African >> countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these >> same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African >> Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have >> attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready >> yet). >> >> The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting >> up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took >> off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss >> about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in >> Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops >> have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders >> invited at the workshops on the way forward. >> >> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country >> follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the >> African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We >> organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina >> Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops >> in the coming two months: >> >> Namibia 23 - 25 October >> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >> Niger 6-8 November >> Benin 13-15 November >> >> Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear >> plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to >> that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. >> >> Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT >> development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge >> Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE >> (attached description). >> >> Best regards, >> Dawit Bekele >> Director, African Regional Bureau >> Internet Society >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >>> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>> >>> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP >> in >>> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >>> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes >> into >>> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long >> term >>> progress. >>> >>> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >>> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge >> place >>> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >>> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >>> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >>> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long >> term >>> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, >> where >>> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best >> practices, >>> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >>> >>> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >>> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >>> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >>> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and >> sharing >>> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift >> the >>> power dynamics. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Mawaki >>> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >>> Association for Progressive Communications :) >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK >> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear members of the list >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>>> around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>>> spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>>> in this direction. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>>> and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>>> continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>>> consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>>> functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>>> IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>>> part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>>> costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and >> consequently >>> bandwidth waste on international routes. >>>> >>>> >>>> Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>>> seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>>> network(s). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>>> but the >>>> (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>>> too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>>> mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>>> competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>>> and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Best regards >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jean-Louis Fullsack >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>>> De : "David Conrad" >>>>> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>> Copie à : >>>>> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>>> >>>>> Hi Norbert, >>>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>>> I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>>> reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>>> that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>>> Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>>> with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more >> places >>> in Africa. >>>>> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>>> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>>> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>>> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>>> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> -drc >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> __ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> __________________________________________________________ >>> __ >>>> 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Sat Oct 20 08:59:18 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 08:59:18 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 7:35 AM, parminder wrote: > > Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest IXPs are there any of these? IXPs serve the interest of Peers primarily. They also have the secondary benefit of keeping traffic local, which is in the public interest. The existence of an IXP is a success, can you point to any IXPs that are "failures"? By what metric do you measure "failure"? > is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is exchanged > at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for telephones. I recall in Uganda, there is a regulatory impost that providers MUST interconnect, but regs do not specify where. They all peer at the UIXP as a matter of convenience. For > which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange traffic with the > smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage and not allow a > level playing field. Just curious to know. That does apply, but normally only amongst the dozen or so tier 1 providers. They want you as their transit customer, not as a peer. At many IXPs, if you peer with one, you peer with all (using a route server model). At many others, peers can make bi-lateral or multilateral peering arrangements. In Africa, IXP development has been going on for ~15 years. The first decade much of the heavy lifting was done by AfriSPA, who are now largely dormant. ISOC has filled that vacuum admirably in the last 3 years. It's not that there is a lack of capacity concerning BGP (routing), that is only about 10% of the work. 90% of setting up an IXP in Africa is Layer 9 and 10 stuff. ISOC workshops also include information and Best Practices in these areas. -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From iza at anr.org Sat Oct 20 09:37:56 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 22:37:56 +0900 Subject: [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <508288ED.9030208@itforchange.net> References: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> <507FA710.2020308@itforchange.net> <508288ED.9030208@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Any views or comments? Izumi 2012年10月20日土曜日 parminder parminder at itforchange.net: > Dear Izumi/ All > > I suggest that we request the organiser of the human rights round table to > > (1) include social, economic and cultural rights in the background note > and the discussions (if specific instances of such rights are needed we can > mention, right to access/use the Internet, net neutrality - or the right to > have the information, communication or content contributed by any one to > the Internet equally as any other, linguistic and other cultural rights vis > a vis the domain name system and so on). Also mention indivisibility of > human rights as the WSIS documents do. > > (2) Not to foreground consumer rights in a human rights write up. > Preferably not to mention it al all, for consumer rights are not human > rights. Certainly not in UN usage. > > Thanks and best, parminder > > On Friday 19 October 2012 06:16 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear Parminder and all, > > I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. > > Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, > and worth a debate. > > While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not > have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we > know, there are different > situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access > to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have > such round table > and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. > > best, > > izumi > > 2012/10/18 parminder : > > Dear Izumi, > > As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG > list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the > organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their > response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea > whether any clarification is provided on my comments > or not, you can make the case for that here. > > Best regards, parminder > > > On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > > Dear list, > > APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. > > Comments welcome. > > izumi > > > > > -- >> 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: -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Sat Oct 20 11:19:06 2012 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 11:19:06 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: References: <39887.10.254.253.3.1350023752.squirrel@sqmail.gn.apc.org> <507FA710.2020308@itforchange.net> <508288ED.9030208@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Believe the two points express clear the idea. Vanda Scartezini Sent from my iPad On 20/10/2012, at 09:37, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Any views or comments? > > Izumi > > 2012年10月20日土曜日 parminder parminder at itforchange.net: >> Dear Izumi/ All >> >> I suggest that we request the organiser of the human rights round table to >> >> (1) include social, economic and cultural rights in the background note and the discussions (if specific instances of such rights are needed we can mention, right to access/use the Internet, net neutrality - or the right to have the information, communication or content contributed by any one to the Internet equally as any other, linguistic and other cultural rights vis a vis the domain name system and so on). Also mention indivisibility of human rights as the WSIS documents do. >> >> (2) Not to foreground consumer rights in a human rights write up. Preferably not to mention it al all, for consumer rights are not human rights. Certainly not in UN usage. >> >> Thanks and best, parminder >> >> On Friday 19 October 2012 06:16 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>> Dear Parminder and all, >>> >>> I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. >>> >>> Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, >>> and worth a debate. >>> >>> While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not >>> have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we >>> know, there are different >>> situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access >>> to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have >>> such round table >>> and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. >>> >>> best, >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> 2012/10/18 parminder : >>>> Dear Izumi, >>>> >>>> As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG >>>> list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the >>>> organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their >>>> response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea >>>> whether any clarification is provided on my comments >>>> or not, you can make the case for that here. >>>> >>>> Best regards, parminder >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear list, >>>> >>>> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >>>> >>>> Comments welcome. >>>> >>>> izumi >>>> >>>> >> > > > -- > >> 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.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: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Sat Oct 20 11:27:06 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 08:27:06 -0700 Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0368E7E3-82B9-4DE2-9500-BBD45AE3CAD0@virtualized.org> Hi, On Oct 19, 2012, at 11:49 AM, Devon Blake wrote: > http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-banks-under-cyber-attack-iran-money-safe-151123675.html > Is this a response to Stuxnet? or is this the beginning of a cyberwar? It is (perhaps not surprisingly) quite difficult to determine what is actually going on from the level of information available to the general public. However, within some security circles, there have been rumors of this sort of thing happening in this timeframe for some time now, e.g.: http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/tag/russian-cyber-attacks/ http://blogs.rsa.com/rsafarl/cyber-gang-seeks-botmasters-to-wage-massive-wave-of-trojan-attacks-against-u-s-banks/ Other interpretations has been this is part of an ongoing campaign to protest the "Innocence of Muslims" 'movie', Iranian retribution for Stuxnet, or a false flag operation by US/Israelis in preparation for an attack against Iran. Pick your poison... Regards, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Sat Oct 20 12:42:47 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:42:47 +0200 Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack In-Reply-To: <0368E7E3-82B9-4DE2-9500-BBD45AE3CAD0@virtualized.org> References: <0368E7E3-82B9-4DE2-9500-BBD45AE3CAD0@virtualized.org> Message-ID: Another poison option. When leaks are unavoidable, as in such a grand operation, a tried tactic is to create bogus leaks. E.g. in WW2 the British organized bogus radio traffic, press clips, troop concentrations, along the (english) Channel. Then the Allies landed in Normandy. Hitler, so convinced that it was a diversion, kept a tank army in standstill in the north of France for 3 days. Then it was too late, the landing had grown roots. Louis - - - On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 5:27 PM, David Conrad wrote: > Hi, > > On Oct 19, 2012, at 11:49 AM, Devon Blake wrote: > > > http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-banks-under-cyber-attack-iran-money-safe-151123675.html > Is this a response to Stuxnet? or is this the beginning of a cyberwar? > > > It is (perhaps not surprisingly) quite difficult to determine what is > actually going on from the level of information available to the general > public. However, within some security circles, there have been rumors of > this sort of thing happening in this timeframe for some time now, e.g.: > > http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/tag/russian-cyber-attacks/ > > http://blogs.rsa.com/rsafarl/cyber-gang-seeks-botmasters-to-wage-massive-wave-of-trojan-attacks-against-u-s-banks/ > > Other interpretations has been this is part of an ongoing campaign to > protest the "Innocence of Muslims" 'movie', Iranian retribution for > Stuxnet, or a false flag operation by US/Israelis in preparation for an > attack against Iran. > > Pick your poison... > > Regards, > -drc > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From hakik at hakik.org Sat Oct 20 16:22:56 2012 From: hakik at hakik.org (Hakikur Rahman) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:22:56 +0100 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.n et-848786940-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-848786940-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> Message-ID: If I may allow to share my experience while establishing the lone IXP in Bangladesh in 2004 is to talk with both parties (ISPs and government regulators) about the win-win situation. In terms of ISPs they save money, and in terms of regulators, they can have a single point of entry (for any sort of control, though I do not like to initiate any arguments or contradictions about it. It is very environment specific.). Further, IXPs could be seen as a not-for-profit entities, thus to sustain their activities they can introduce some sort of membership fee, which is affordable to all connected parties. There are many existing ISPs and they have their membership forms with rules or formalities. One need to study a few and make a framework that is suitable to the specific entry point (country, or city). Best regards, Hakikur At 13:12 20-10-2012, Alejandro Pisanty wrote: >Parminder,Market power and large asymmetries in >traffic are indeed a serious factor in this. >Lots of good bilateral agreements between ISPs >and good engineering go far in optimizing >traffic in absence of an IXP. Forcing >interconnection by law or government action >seems tempting but bites back hard; need to >collect case studies for further analysis. Are >you talking to ISPs close by or do you have a >study for India?Yours,Alejandro Pisanty >Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® ! !! !!! >!!!!NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE >TELEFONO+52-1-5541444475 FROM >ABROAD+525541444475 DESDE MEXICOSMS >+525541444475 Dr. Alejandro PisantyUNAM, Av. >Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF MexicoBlog: >http://pisanty.blogspot.comLinkedIn: >http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisantyUnete al grupo >UNAM en LinkedIn, >http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614Twitter: >http://twitter.com/apisanty---->> Unete a ISOC >Mexico, http://www.isoc.org. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >From: parminder >Sender: >Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 +0530 >To: >ReplyTo: , >parminder >Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > >Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures >of most public interest IXPs is that there is no >regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is >exchanged at given national or regional >exchanges, like there is for telephones. For >which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to >exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order >to keep the market power advantage and not allow >a level playing field. Just curious to know. > >parminder > > > >On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> >>Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my >>questions. >> >>Mawaki >> >>On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele >> wrote: >>> >>>Hi all, >>> >>>As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System >>>(AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would >>>like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS >>>project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims >>>at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the >>>project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African >>>countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these >>>same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African >>>Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have >>>attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready >>>yet). >>> >>>The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting >>>up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took >>>off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss >>>about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in >>>Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops >>>have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders >>>invited at the workshops on the way forward. >>> >>>As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country >>>follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the >>>African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We >>>organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina >>>Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops >>>in the coming two months: >>> >>>Namibia 23 - 25 October >>>Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >>>Niger 6-8 November >>>Benin 13-15 November >>> >>>Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear >>>plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to >>>that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. >>> >>>Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT >>>development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge >>>Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE >>>(attached description). >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Dawit Bekele >>>Director, African Regional Bureau >>>Internet Society >>> >>> >>>> >>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>From: >>>>governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>[mailto:governance- >>>>request at lists.igcaucus.org] >>>>On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >>>>Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >>>>To: >>>>governance at lists.igcaucus.org; >>>>Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>>>Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>> >>>>Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP >>> >>>in >>>> >>>>Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >>>>any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes >>> >>>into >>>> >>>>account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long >>> >>>term >>>> >>>>progress. >>>> >>>>In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >>>>"consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge >>> >>>place >>>> >>>>where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >>>>Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >>>>strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >>>>which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long >>> >>>term >>>> >>>>advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, >>> >>>where >>>> >>>>policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best >>> >>>practices, >>>> >>>>and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >>>> >>>>A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >>>>incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >>>>destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >>>>Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and >>> >>>sharing >>>> >>>>information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift >>> >>>the >>>> >>>>power dynamics. >>>> >>>>Best, >>>> >>>>Mawaki >>>>otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >>>>Association for Progressive Communications :) >>>> >>>>On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>> >>> >>>> >>>>wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Dear members of the list >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>>>>around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>>>>spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>>>>in this direction. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>>>>and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>>>>continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>>>>consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>>>>functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>>>>IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>>>>part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>>>>costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and >>> >>>consequently >>>> >>>>bandwidth waste on international routes. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>>>>seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>>>>network(s). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>>>>but the >>>>>(expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>>>>too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>>>>mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>>>>competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>>>>and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Best regards >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Jean-Louis Fullsack >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>>>>De : "David Conrad" >>>>>>A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>>>Copie à : >>>>>>Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi Norbert, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>>>>reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>>>>that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>>>>Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>>>>with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more >>> >>>places >>>> >>>>in Africa. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>>>>partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>>>>technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>>>>that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>>>>know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>>>> >>>>>>Regards, >>>>>>-drc >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>__________________________________________________________ >>>>__ >>>>>> >>>>>>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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>__________________________________________________________ >>>>__ >>>>> >>>>>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 >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >____________________________________________________________ >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: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Sat Oct 20 17:32:49 2012 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 21:32:49 +0000 Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack In-Reply-To: References: <0368E7E3-82B9-4DE2-9500-BBD45AE3CAD0@virtualized.org>, Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B156FE9@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> I'm, if possible, more cynical than all of you: banks and their customers are under cyberattack 24/7. I don't see anything substantially new here. To me it looks like the 'proprietary' trojan bad guys and proprietary info security firms that use things like this to scare corporate clients into buying their solutions...are just working in closer, of course coincidental, cooperation than usual. Seriously, US banks are supposed to be majorly afraid of some group that managed to steal $5m over several years; and which is now advertising its forthcoming attack on Youtube? Doubt it. ________________________________ From: pouzin at gmail.com [pouzin at gmail.com] on behalf of Louis Pouzin (well) [pouzin at well.com] Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 12:42 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; David Conrad Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack Another poison option. When leaks are unavoidable, as in such a grand operation, a tried tactic is to create bogus leaks. E.g. in WW2 the British organized bogus radio traffic, press clips, troop concentrations, along the (english) Channel. Then the Allies landed in Normandy. Hitler, so convinced that it was a diversion, kept a tank army in standstill in the north of France for 3 days. Then it was too late, the landing had grown roots. Louis - - - On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 5:27 PM, David Conrad > wrote: Hi, On Oct 19, 2012, at 11:49 AM, Devon Blake > wrote: http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-banks-under-cyber-attack-iran-money-safe-151123675.html Is this a response to Stuxnet? or is this the beginning of a cyberwar? It is (perhaps not surprisingly) quite difficult to determine what is actually going on from the level of information available to the general public. However, within some security circles, there have been rumors of this sort of thing happening in this timeframe for some time now, e.g.: http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/tag/russian-cyber-attacks/ http://blogs.rsa.com/rsafarl/cyber-gang-seeks-botmasters-to-wage-massive-wave-of-trojan-attacks-against-u-s-banks/ Other interpretations has been this is part of an ongoing campaign to protest the "Innocence of Muslims" 'movie', Iranian retribution for Stuxnet, or a false flag operation by US/Israelis in preparation for an attack against Iran. Pick your poison... Regards, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Sat Oct 20 19:43:15 2012 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 18:43:15 -0500 Subject: [governance] US Banks under cyber attack In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am trying to see these activities and the responses to this thread in the lnterests of the IG community. As posited by some of these responses, these attack could be: 1. A means of buying time while resources are being marshalled for the real and more devastating attack. 2. Nuisance attacks aimed at undercutting real value such as labour time, and or equipment time that could have been used for increased productivity. 3. Depending on who is suspected of initiating the threat, It could be a red herring strategy designed to give the Western powers an excuse to go after radical and internet containment regimes. I cannot fully agree that banks are fullly secure, as i do not believe the losses and costs of internet attacks on banks are not necessarily readily available to the non bank community. Banks are always vulnerable as their main currency is trust, when that is eroded either through their own actions or the actions of others the result could be catastrophic. It is not even necessary to have successful attacks, as long as information on the attacks can be published in such a way that it undermines public trust. With Social Network Sales projected to grow in 2012 from $US3B to $US14B by 2015, They will become fair targets for interception and redirection strategies which again could affect consumer confidence in social networks as a sales tool. I guess this is just the tip of of the ice berg, civil society who will most likely be the main victims in these scenarios, need to develop the necessary awareness of those basic internet habits that are detrimental to their online security, and those habits they need to build so that they may increase that same security. On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > The war's been on for years now. (with an unseen/unrecognizable enemy) > > Actually with today's fast moving world, time is a more critical > commodity. I'll take spam as an example. > > If it's possible to have people spend 10 minutes more checking spam, or > make people check their email less often due to the vast amount of spam in > it, the attack has claimed a victim. > > The implications are pretty significant - it may just be 10 minutes per > person - but weekly it adds up to almost an hour of active email > checking/deleting - plus the risk of a worm/virus coming in with the > message. For an organization with 1000 people it's 1000 man hours per week > wasted - which costs a fortune. In defence projects and suchlike inspite of > safety measures if one worm gets into the facility it can waste even 10 > times more time than that (because nobody wants a worm crawling around on > their network). > > Yes money is important - but with other victims easier to take like time, > social media account information (because most are fairly careful with > their bank details now-a-days) - it's still fairly easy to make a strike. > > Just IMHO, for the consumer/customer I'd rank time > virus-threat > > password theft, and given 90% people already check the security certificate > (or look for the 'green bar' on FF) I'd say financial theft is slightly > less likely, and most consumers would not care too much as long as there's > no theft. Most think SSL is bulletproof!! They trust the banks (and their > security) implicitly. > > For financials it's usually to get an alternative if the online banking > service is offline - like phonebanking or sms banking - or pop down to an > ATM and check the cash... Not as much of a threat as long as there's no > data theft (which, TBH, the banks are doing a good job of keeping safe). > > -C > > On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Devon Blake wrote: > >> >> http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/u-banks-under-cyber-attack-iran-money-safe-151123675.html >> Is this a response to Stuxnet? or is this the beginning of a cyberwar? >> >> -- >> Devon Blake >> Special Projects Director >> Earthwise Solutions Limited >> 29 Dominica Drive >> Kgn 5 >> ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 >> >> To be kind, To be helpful, To network >> *Earthwise ... For Life!* >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Sun Oct 21 00:38:22 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 10:38:22 +0600 Subject: [governance] World's First Flying File-Sharing Drones in Action Message-ID: <001801cdaf46$1104a120$330de360$@gmail.com> World 's First Flying File-Sharing Drones in Action http://torrentfreak.com/worlds-first-flying-file-sharing-drones-in-action-12 0320/ A few days ago The Pirate Bay announced that in future parts of its site could be hosted on GPS controlled drones. To many this may have sounded like a joke, but in fact these pirate drones already exist. Project "Electronic Countermeasures" has built a swarm of five fully operational drones which prove that an "aerial Napster" or an "airborne Pirate Bay" is not as futuristic as it sounds. picture of a drone In an ever-continuing effort to thwart censorship, The Pirate Bay plans to turn flying drones into mobile hosting locations . "Everyone knows WHAT TPB is. Now they're going to have to think about WHERE TPB is," The Pirate Bay team told TorrentFreak last Sunday, announcing their drone project. Liam Young, co-founder of Tomorrow 's Thoughts Today, was amazed to read the announcement, not so much because of the technology, because his group has already built a swarm of file-sharing drones. "I thought hold on, we are already doing that," Young told TorrentFreak. Their starting point for project "Electronic Countermeasures" was to create something akin to an 'aerial Napster' or 'airborne Pirate Bay', but it became much more than that. "Part nomadic infrastructure and part robotic swarm, we have rebuilt and programmed the drones to broadcast their own local Wi-Fi network as a form of aerial Napster. They swarm into formation, broadcasting their pirate network, and then disperse, escaping detection, only to reform elsewhere," says the group describing their creation. File-Sharing Drone in Action (photo by Claus Langer ) picture of a sharing drone In short the system allows the public to share data with the help of flying drones. Much like the Pirate Box , but one that flies autonomously over the city. "The public can upload files, photos and share data with one another as the drones float above the significant public spaces of the city. The swarm becomes a pirate broadcast network, a mobile infrastructure that passers-by can interact with," the creators explain. One major difference compared to more traditional file-sharing hubs is that it requires a hefty investment. Each of the drones costs 1500 euros to build. Not a big surprise, considering the hardware that's needed to keep these pirate hubs in the air. "Each one is powered by 2x 2200mAh LiPo batteries. The lift is provided by 4x Roxxy Brushless Motors that run off a GPS flight control board. Also on deck are altitude sensors and gyros that keep the flight stable. They all talk to a master control system through XBee wireless modules," Young told TorrentFreak. "These all sit on a 10mm x 10mm aluminum frame and are wrapped in a vacuum formed aerodynamic cowling. The network is broadcast using various different hardware setups ranging from Linux gumstick modules, wireless routers and USB sticks for file storage." For Young and his crew this is just the beginning. With proper financial support they hope to build more drones and increase the range they can cover. "We are planning on scaling up the system by increasing broadcast range and building more drones for the flock. We are also building in other systems like autonomous battery change bases. We are looking for funding and backers to assist us in scaling up the system," he told us. Those who see the drones in action (video below) will notice that they're not just practical. The creative and artistic background of the group shines through, with the choreography performed by the drones perhaps even more stunning than the sharing component. "When the audience interacts with the drones they glow with vibrant colors, they break formation, they are called over and their flight pattern becomes more dramatic and expressive," the group explains. Besides the artistic value, the drones can also have other use cases than being a "pirate hub." For example, they can serve as peer-to-peer communications support for protesters and activists in regions where Internet access is censored. Either way, whether it's Hollywood or a dictator, there will always be groups that have a reason to shoot the machines down. But let's be honest, who would dare to destroy such a beautiful piece of art? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fahd.batayneh at gmail.com Sun Oct 21 12:20:30 2012 From: fahd.batayneh at gmail.com (Fahd A. Batayneh) Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 19:20:30 +0300 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Message-ID: The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy Fahd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Oct 22 03:22:07 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:52:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> Message-ID: <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> Dear Alejandro, Thanks for your response. No, I have not been talking to the ISPs in India, and do not understand the situation really well. However I have heard remarks that, even after many years of setting up of India's national Internet exchange NIXI, a very larger part of the domestic traffic still gets routed from outside back to India. It appears to me that compulsory exchange of traffic, on open peering basis, with zero settlement charges, would be good for an open and competitive Internet ecology. I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on requester pays. Possibly, some kind of hybrid model which takes into account 'an overall framework' of actual cost and benefit accruing among different sized ISPs may be possible to evolve. (Of course, any kind of sender pays system is taboo, as it contorts the very structure of the Internet.) I do think that some amount of public interest regulation is requiredat the transport layer of the Internetto keep the Internet as a really open system, as was in the case with telephone traffic exchanged at PSTNs, although the dynamics and thus the needed remedies in the case of the Internet are different. The content/ applications layer however is a completely different ball game and does not require similar 'public utility' kind of regulatory attention. (There can however be issues when some application providers becomes the monopoly provider of some basic digital enablement or facilities. However the point of departure for the required legal/ regulatory attention in such cases would be different - for instance, like the current US FTC investigations into Google's search engine practices.) Regards parminder On Saturday 20 October 2012 05:41 PM, Alejandro Pisanty wrote: > Parminder, > > Market power and large asymmetries in traffic are indeed a serious > factor in this. Lots of good bilateral agreements between ISPs and > good engineering go far in optimizing traffic in absence of an IXP. > Forcing interconnection by law or government action seems tempting but > bites back hard; need to collect case studies for further analysis. > Are you talking to ISPs close by or do you have a study for India? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From: * parminder > *Sender: * > *Date: *Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 +0530 > *To: * > *ReplyTo: * , parminder > > *Subject: *Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > > Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest > IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic > is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is > for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to > exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market > power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. > > parminder > > > > On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my >> questions. >> >> Mawaki >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System >>> (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would >>> like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS >>> project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims >>> at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the >>> project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African >>> countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these >>> same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African >>> Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have >>> attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready >>> yet). >>> >>> The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting >>> up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took >>> off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss >>> about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in >>> Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops >>> have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders >>> invited at the workshops on the way forward. >>> >>> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country >>> follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the >>> African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We >>> organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina >>> Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops >>> in the coming two months: >>> >>> Namibia 23 - 25 October >>> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >>> Niger 6-8 November >>> Benin 13-15 November >>> >>> Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear >>> plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to >>> that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. >>> >>> Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT >>> development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge >>> Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE >>> (attached description). >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Dawit Bekele >>> Director, African Regional Bureau >>> Internet Society >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >>>> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >>>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >>>> To:governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>> >>>> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP >>> in >>>> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >>>> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes >>> into >>>> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long >>> term >>>> progress. >>>> >>>> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >>>> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge >>> place >>>> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >>>> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >>>> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >>>> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long >>> term >>>> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, >>> where >>>> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best >>> practices, >>>> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >>>> >>>> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >>>> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >>>> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >>>> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and >>> sharing >>>> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift >>> the >>>> power dynamics. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Mawaki >>>> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >>>> Association for Progressive Communications :) >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Dear members of the list >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>>>> around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>>>> spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>>>> in this direction. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>>>> and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>>>> continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>>>> consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>>>> functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>>>> IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>>>> part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>>>> costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and >>> consequently >>>> bandwidth waste on international routes. >>>>> >>>>> Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>>>> seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>>>> network(s). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>>>> but the >>>>> (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>>>> too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>>>> mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>>>> competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>>>> and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jean-Louis Fullsack >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>>>> De : "David Conrad" >>>>>> A :governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>>> Copie à : >>>>>> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Norbert, >>>>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>>>> I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>>>> reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>>>> that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>>>> Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>>>> with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more >>> places >>>> in Africa. >>>>>> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>>>> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>>>> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>>>> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>>>> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> -drc >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________ >>>> __ >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________ >>>> __ >>>>> 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Oct 22 03:37:02 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:37:02 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4B7@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Parminder, I recommend to consult Rajesh Chharia so that you can understand the situation in India better. He is the president of the Indian ISP Association. (rc at cjnet4u.com). He was with our ICANN Studienkreis meeting in Oslo and I had good discussion with him in Toronto. He would be also a good contact to discuss Internet Governance issues and enhanced cooperation. BTW, I was listening carefully to what your Minister Sachin Pilot had to say in Budapest to enhanced cooperation. An interesting move which was also recognized by Fadi in his opening speech as ICANNs CEO in Toronto. Wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von parminder Gesendet: Mo 22.10.2012 09:22 An: apisan at unam.mx Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Dear Alejandro, Thanks for your response. No, I have not been talking to the ISPs in India, and do not understand the situation really well. However I have heard remarks that, even after many years of setting up of India's national Internet exchange NIXI, a very larger part of the domestic traffic still gets routed from outside back to India. It appears to me that compulsory exchange of traffic, on open peering basis, with zero settlement charges, would be good for an open and competitive Internet ecology. I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on requester pays. Possibly, some kind of hybrid model which takes into account 'an overall framework' of actual cost and benefit accruing among different sized ISPs may be possible to evolve. (Of course, any kind of sender pays system is taboo, as it contorts the very structure of the Internet.) I do think that some amount of public interest regulation is required at the transport layer of the Internet to keep the Internet as a really open system, as was in the case with telephone traffic exchanged at PSTNs, although the dynamics and thus the needed remedies in the case of the Internet are different. The content/ applications layer however is a completely different ball game and does not require similar 'public utility' kind of regulatory attention. (There can however be issues when some application providers becomes the monopoly provider of some basic digital enablement or facilities. However the point of departure for the required legal/ regulatory attention in such cases would be different - for instance, like the current US FTC investigations into Google's search engine practices.) Regards parminder On Saturday 20 October 2012 05:41 PM, Alejandro Pisanty wrote: Parminder, Market power and large asymmetries in traffic are indeed a serious factor in this. Lots of good bilateral agreements between ISPs and good engineering go far in optimizing traffic in absence of an IXP. Forcing interconnection by law or government action seems tempting but bites back hard; need to collect case studies for further analysis. Are you talking to ISPs close by or do you have a study for India? Yours, Alejandro Pisanty Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ From: parminder Sender: Date: Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 +0530 To: ReplyTo: , parminder Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. parminder On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my questions. Mawaki On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: Hi all, As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready yet). The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders invited at the workshops on the way forward. As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops in the coming two months: Namibia 23 - 25 October Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 Niger 6-8 November Benin 13-15 November Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE (attached description). Best regards, Dawit Bekele Director, African Regional Bureau Internet Society -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP in Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes into account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long term progress. In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge place where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long term advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, where policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best practices, and then try to win over policy-makers to it. A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and sharing information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift the power dynamics. Best, Mawaki otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only Association for Progressive Communications :) On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: Dear members of the list The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step in this direction. But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and consequently bandwidth waste on international routes. Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting network(s). Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation but the (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. Best regards Jean-Louis Fullsack Message du 18/10/12 21:10 De : "David Conrad" A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Copie à : Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Hi Norbert, On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. Regards, -drc __________________________________________________________ __ 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 __________________________________________________________ __ 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Oct 22 03:44:27 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:14:27 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level > meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet > Economy in Washington, D.C. > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy From the agreement text: Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. SNIP ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. (quotes end) So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop '/*international */framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. parminder > > Fahd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Mon Oct 22 06:01:17 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:01:17 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1175043977.19196.1350900077646.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Parminder's questioning is perfectly justified. I'd add another question : why are African IXP in place and idle ? What a waste of precious money which would be employed for useful needs ... The root cause is always the same : a lack of consultation between the main actors of the ICT domain and the neoliberal credo "let's build, they'll come".This model failed to develop consistently any network at any level in Africa ! However, AU and the ITU still support it. At the very beginning of the WSIS I proposed -with the agreement of the CS Plenary- that NW operators and ICT main actors select the relevant sites where IXPs should be created having in mind both the (present ans future) Internet traffic to be exchanged there and the state and evolution of the telecom backbone networks. This proposal, although it has been reiterated different times in different prepcoms and during the WSIS follow-up process, has never collected the consens of the main parties involved, namely the AU and the ITU. "Cherchez l'erreur" as we use to say in France. Best Jean-Louis Fullsack BTW : I'd also Thank Mawaki Chango for his 10.19. mail to the list. I'll try to answer his questions later. > Message du 20/10/12 13:35 > De : "parminder" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > > Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. > > parminder > > > > On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: >Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my questions. Mawaki On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: Hi all, As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready yet). The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders invited at the workshops on the way forward. As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops in the coming two months: Namibia 23 - 25 October Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 Niger 6-8 November Benin 13-15 November Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE (attached description). Best regards, Dawit Bekele Director, African Regional Bureau Internet Society -----Original Message----- From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP in Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes into account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long term progress. In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge place where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long term advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, where policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best practices, and then try to win over policy-makers to it. A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and sharing information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift the power dynamics. Best, Mawaki otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only Association for Progressive Communications :) On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: Dear members of the list The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step in this direction. But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and consequently bandwidth waste on international routes. Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting network(s). Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation but the (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. Best regards Jean-Louis Fullsack Message du 18/10/12 21:10 De : "David Conrad" A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org Copie à : Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Hi Norbert, On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more places in Africa. My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. Regards, -drc __________________________________________________________ __ 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 __________________________________________________________ __ 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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From dvbirve at yandex.ru Mon Oct 22 06:36:20 2012 From: dvbirve at yandex.ru (Shcherbovich Andrey) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:36:20 +0400 Subject: [governance] On Remote hubs: technical issues Message-ID: <2082601350902180@web12e.yandex.ru> Dear colleagues! We are making a hub for our workshop #134. Our IT service need to know IGF's IP address on which we need to connect, and also type of your equipment to accomodate it with ours. Maybe this could help? Thanks! Andrey Shcherbovich Higher School of Economics, Moscow -------------- 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 From ginger at paque.net Mon Oct 22 06:51:31 2012 From: ginger at paque.net (Ginger Paque) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 05:51:31 -0500 Subject: [governance] On Remote hubs: technical issues In-Reply-To: <2082601350902180@web12e.yandex.ru> References: <2082601350902180@web12e.yandex.ru> Message-ID: Congratulations, Andrey! I hope your hub will join all four days of the workshop! I have copied Remote Hub help on this email, but please write them to explain your question very specifically. Did you register your hub? http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/hub-registration-2012 See hub instructions: http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation/hubs-instructions You can use these emails for help on RP issues: *Email helpline :* Remote Participation general help: rp at intgovforum.org Remote participation workshops Moderators help: rm at intgovforum.org Remote Panellist help : rpp at intgovforum.org Remote Hubs help: rh at intgovforum.org Webcasting help: webcasting at intgovforum.org Good luck! Let us know if we can help in any way. Regards, Ginger On 22 October 2012 05:36, Shcherbovich Andrey wrote: > > Dear colleagues! > > We are making a hub for our workshop #134. > Our IT service need to know IGF's IP address on which we need to connect, > and also type of your equipment to accomodate it with ours. > > Maybe this could help? > > > Thanks! > > Andrey Shcherbovich > Higher School of Economics, Moscow > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Mon Oct 22 08:03:15 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:03:15 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable Message-ID: <571476666.25978.1350907395371.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> I fully support Parminder's point (2). Consumer rights are mostly related to a specific product/service provided by a public or mostly by a business entity, and there are different/specific regulations and legislation in each country for settling these disputes. Let's not confuse rights that are basically different unless we dissolve HR in a mess of ordinary isssues. Best Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 20/10/12 15:38 > De : "Izumi AIZU" > A : "governance" > Copie à : > Objet : [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > > Any views or comments? >Izumi > 2012年10月20日土曜日 parminder parminder at itforchange.net: > Dear Izumi/ All > > I suggest that we request the organiser of the human rights round table to > > (1) include social, economic and cultural rights in the background note and the discussions (if specific instances of such rights are needed we can mention, right to access/use the Internet, net neutrality - or the right to have the information, communication or content contributed by any one to the Internet equally as any other, linguistic and other cultural rights vis a vis the domain name system and so on). Also mention indivisibility of human rights as the WSIS documents do. > > (2) Not to foreground consumer rights in a human rights write up. Preferably not to mention it al all, for consumer rights are not human rights. Certainly not in UN usage. > > Thanks and best, parminder > > On Friday 19 October 2012 06:16 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >Dear Parminder and all, I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, and worth a debate. While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we know, there are different situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have such round table and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. best, izumi 2012/10/18 parminder : Dear Izumi, As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea whether any clarification is provided on my comments or not, you can make the case for that here. Best regards, parminder On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: Dear list, APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. Comments welcome. izumi > > > -- > >> 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.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: -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Mon Oct 22 08:26:13 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:26:13 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Isn't this a joke : ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities:> · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing.> · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! Best Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > De : "parminder" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: >The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > From the agreement text: > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. > > SNIP > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing.> · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide.> · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > (quotes end) > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. > > parminder > > > > > > > > Fahd > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Mon Oct 22 09:38:22 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:38:22 +0200 Subject: AW: [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable References: <571476666.25978.1350907395371.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4D5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> The difference is that human rights are natural rights (own by the indivdual him/herself). Human rights are not "given" by government, it is that the governments have a legal obligation to respect and promote human rights. Consumer rights are contractual rights between a producer/service provider and a user/consumer based on general legislation provided by the government/parliament. wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Jean-Louis FULLSACK Gesendet: Mo 22.10.2012 14:03 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; IzumiAIZU Betreff: re: [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable I fully support Parminder's point (2). Consumer rights are mostly related to a specific product/service provided by a public or mostly by a business entity, and there are different/specific regulations and legislation in each country for settling these disputes. Let's not confuse rights that are basically different unless we dissolve HR in a mess of ordinary isssues. Best Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 20/10/12 15:38 > De : "Izumi AIZU" > A : "governance" > Copie à : > Objet : [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > > Any views or comments? > Izumi > 2012?10?20???? parminder parminder at itforchange.net: > Dear Izumi/ All > > I suggest that we request the organiser of the human rights round table to > > (1) include social, economic and cultural rights in the background note and the discussions (if specific instances of such rights are needed we can mention, right to access/use the Internet, net neutrality - or the right to have the information, communication or content contributed by any one to the Internet equally as any other, linguistic and other cultural rights vis a vis the domain name system and so on). Also mention indivisibility of human rights as the WSIS documents do. > > (2) Not to foreground consumer rights in a human rights write up. Preferably not to mention it al all, for consumer rights are not human rights. Certainly not in UN usage. > > Thanks and best, parminder > > On Friday 19 October 2012 06:16 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear Parminder and all, I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, and worth a debate. While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we know, there are different situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have such round table and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. best, izumi 2012/10/18 parminder : Dear Izumi, As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea whether any clarification is provided on my comments or not, you can make the case for that here. Best regards, parminder On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: Dear list, APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. Comments welcome. izumi > > > -- > >> 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 09:44:24 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:44:24 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <1175043977.19196.1350900077646.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <1175043977.19196.1350900077646.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Message-ID: JL, On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > > > Parminder's questioning is perfectly justified. I'd add another question : > why are African IXP in place and idle ? They are not idle by any means. What do you mean by this? What a waste of precious money which > would be employed for useful needs ... The root cause is always the same : a > lack of consultation between the main actors of the ICT domain and the > neoliberal credo "let's build, they'll come".This model failed to develop > consistently any network at any level in Africa ! However, AU and the ITU > still support it. > > > > At the very beginning of the WSIS I proposed -with the agreement of the CS > Plenary- that NW operators and ICT main actors select the relevant sites > where IXPs should be created having in mind both the (present ans future) > Internet traffic to be exchanged there and the state and evolution of the > telecom backbone networks. This proposal, although it has been reiterated > different times in different prepcoms and during the WSIS follow-up process, > has never collected the consens of the main parties involved, namely the AU > and the ITU. > > > > "Cherchez l'erreur" as we use to say in France. > > > > Best > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > BTW : I'd also Thank Mawaki Chango for his 10.19. mail to the list. I'll try > to answer his questions later. > > > > >> Message du 20/10/12 13:35 >> De : "parminder" >> A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Copie à : >> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> > >> Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest >> IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic is >> exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is for >> telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to exchange >> traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market power advantage >> and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. >> >> parminder >> >> >> >> > On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> > > Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my > questions. > > Mawaki > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: > > Hi all, > > As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System > (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would > like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS > project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims > at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the > project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African > countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these > same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African > Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have > attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready > yet). > > The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting > up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took > off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss > about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in > Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops > have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders > invited at the workshops on the way forward. > > As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country > follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the > African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We > organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina > Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops > in the coming two months: > > Namibia 23 - 25 October > Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 > Niger 6-8 November > Benin 13-15 November > > Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear > plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to > that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. > > Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT > development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge > Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE > (attached description). > > Best regards, > Dawit Bekele > Director, African Regional Bureau > Internet Society > > > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango > Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK > Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP > > in > > Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about > any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes > > into > > account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long > > term > > progress. > > In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a > "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge > > place > > where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? > Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and > strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" > which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long > > term > > advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, > > where > > policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best > > practices, > > and then try to win over policy-makers to it. > > A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any > incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative > destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. > Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and > > sharing > > information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift > > the > > power dynamics. > > Best, > > Mawaki > otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only > Association for Progressive Communications :) > > On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > > > > wrote: > > Dear members of the list > > > > The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are > around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and > spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step > in this direction. > > > > But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional > and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less > continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a > consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very > functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining > IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, > part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high > costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and > > consequently > > bandwidth waste on international routes. > > Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit > seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting > network(s). > > > > Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation > but the > (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take > too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this > mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard > competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union > and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. > > > > Best regards > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > Message du 18/10/12 21:10 > De : "David Conrad" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > Hi Norbert, > > > > On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: > > I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is > reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication > that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier > Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained > with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more > > places > > in Africa. > > My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC > partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is > technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia > that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I > know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. > > Regards, > -drc > > > > __________________________________________________________ > __ > > 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 > > > > __________________________________________________________ > __ > > 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 > > > > > > >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 09:45:16 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:45:16 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable In-Reply-To: <571476666.25978.1350907395371.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> References: <571476666.25978.1350907395371.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Message-ID: It seems the various voices in this thread are saying almost the same things if we shift the frame or perspective as follows: *Consumer rights are APPLICATIONS (in many or most instances) of more fundamental human rights and principles.* As such, consumer rights are part of human rights in their "applied" division, but for other reasons related to being able to have the best discussion at this juncture and with this group of people, I nevertheless concur that there are sound procedural or pragmatic reasons to *focus* in on the most fundamental, core applications of human rights for this roundtable without regard to whether they are classified as "consumer law" (net neutrality being cited as one such issue). Thus, my "Conclusion" paragraph at bottom of this reply follows this brief statement of rationale: As *applications* of more fundamental and universal human rights and principles, consumer rights may be correct applications or they may be flawed and incorrect applications. Occasionally, consumer rights issues may be such that it seems human rights principles are not implicated at all, but in such cases the consumer rights are generally compliant with human rights principles and countries are of course free to adopt diverse consumer laws in the legitimate exercise of self-determination. But *just because a consumer law is compliant with human rights does not mean that human rights are irrelevant to consumer law! * Among other things, Parminder is appropriately concerned that the desired discussion at this time about fundamental human rights principles might well emerge as overly watered down or perhaps slightly vague or awkward if too much time is devoted to particularized applications of human rights such as those in consumer law. While I share this concern to a large extent, at the same time it is suicidal for human rights advocates to risk being seen as denying the applicability (to consumer law or anything else) of laws and principles they are asserting are universal in nature. So, while I agree that a better discussion can probably be had at the present time if specific applications like consumer law are minimized or eliminated, ultimately it would or should be the goal of every supporter of human rights to affirm the applicability of those rights frames without borders and limits to their scope. And indeed Parminder says things and quotes language on precisely this general idea of universality, which is mirrored in many global human rights documents and treaties. Parminder mentions what appears to be an animating concern for his position here, namely keeping the "god of the market" from infecting every single thing. He impliedly sees consumer law as market based or driven, and specifically says consumer law arises "of contracts." Not so. Nearly wherever consumer protection laws are enacted, they are democratically based LIMITS on the freedom and power of contract. Thus, consumer protection laws can and do say that buyers may not waive their rights, via contracts, not to be cheated in contracts for the sale of goods with hidden defects that destroy the value of the goods. Contract law would look only to the existence of a contractual agreement and would hope to find at least a "peppercorn" or even the smallest value or consideration being received by the paying party in order to find a fully enforceable contract, whereas consumer laws are attempting to escape from the consequences of unequal bargaining power between parties and the inherent indignities and harm to civil, political, educational, social and cultural interests that occur when contract power is abused. Again, consumer law is basically an application under specific circumstances of human rights principles, even if fairly frequently the connection is somewhat remote or hard to see because human rights violations or issues are not really present. And again, the fact that something is generally compliant with human rights does not mean human rights are irrelevant to that situation. Human rights are very relevant not only to consumer law but to all law, even if there are very broad areas where pretty much any action is within the proper discretion of governments because the area is basically human-rights-compliant. CONCLUSION: Per the above, in terms of what Parminder called "framing", consumer rights are clearly part of human rights in the sense that they are applications under specific facts of general laws and principles. But I nevertheless would concur in general terms with Parminder's basic position to more or less *carve out consumer law from this particular discussion or agenda*, being careful not to deny the applicability of human rights law to consumer law. The reason for doing so is that given the limited time of any meetings or round tables like this one, *if the agenda is opened up too much to specific applications of human rights laws like consumer law, given the general status and present level of debate surrounding human rights issues, discussing things like consumer law would water down and make unclear a more critically needed discussion regarding the human rights principles themselves and some of their most OBVIOUS applications, like Parminder's mention of net neutrality,* etc. On this basis, I concur with Parminder even though I dissent from some of the specific things he has stated. Paul Lehto, J.D. On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > > > > > I fully support Parminder's point (2). Consumer rights are mostly related > to a specific product/service provided by a public or mostly by a business > entity, and there are different/specific regulations and legislation in > each country for settling these disputes. Let's not confuse rights that are > basically different unless we dissolve HR in a mess of ordinary isssues. > > > > Best > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > Message du 20/10/12 15:38 > > De : "Izumi AIZU" > > A : "governance" > > Copie à : > > Objet : [governance] Re: [igf_members] Proposal: Human Rights Roundtable > > > > > Any views or comments? > > > > Izumi > > > 2012年10月20日土曜日 parminder parminder at itforchange.net: > > >> >> Dear Izumi/ All >> > >> > I suggest that we request the organiser of the human rights round table >> to >> > >> > (1) include social, economic and cultural rights in the background note >> and the discussions (if specific instances of such rights are needed we can >> mention, right to access/use the Internet, net neutrality - or the right to >> have the information, communication or content contributed by any one to >> the Internet equally as any other, linguistic and other cultural rights vis >> a vis the domain name system and so on). Also mention indivisibility of >> human rights as the WSIS documents do. >> > >> > (2) Not to foreground consumer rights in a human rights write up. >> Preferably not to mention it al all, for consumer rights are not human >> rights. Certainly not in UN usage. >> > >> > Thanks and best, parminder >> > >> > >> On Friday 19 October 2012 06:16 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> > >> >> Dear Parminder and all, >> >> I thought it is worth asking the list if we support this round table in general. >> >> Whether consumer rights be part of Human right or not is of course important, >> and worth a debate. >> >> While the organizer will have their position, I think we, IGC do not >> have to make a single position on this issue for support or not. As we >> know, there are different >> situations/contexts on consumer right issues around the globe, as well as access >> to Internet and other Internet issues, I think it is worth to have >> such round table >> and discuss in depth, rather than making one position beforehand. >> >> best, >> >> izumi >> >> 2012/10/18 parminder : >> >> Dear Izumi, >> >> As you know I have submitted a detailed comment on this proposal to the MAG >> list which I will presently forward. I havent got any response from the >> organisers, which I still hope will come. I think we should wait for their >> response before we can form a view on it. However, if you support the idea >> whether any clarification is provided on my comments >> or not, you can make the case for that here. >> >> Best regards, parminder >> >> >> On Thursday 18 October 2012 06:50 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >> Dear list, >> >> APC has proposed this and I think IGC should support this. >> >> Comments welcome. >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > > > > > -- > > >> 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.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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Mon Oct 22 11:08:21 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Alejandro Pisanty) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:08:21 +0000 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <61699342-1350918507-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-40569888-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> Parminder, 1. This will help you (re "not understanding really well" re IXP situation): http://oecdinsights.org/2012/10/22/internet-traffic-exchange-2-billion-users-and-its-done-on-a-handshake/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=internet-traffic-exchange-2-billion-users-and-its-done-on-a-handshake Includes reference to silent good work of engineers I mentioned previously. 2. Re traffic going out of India and back, measure, measure! Traceroute is your friend. Use the publicly available Web-based ones as well. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -----Original Message----- From: parminder Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:52:07 To: Cc: Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point Dear Alejandro, Thanks for your response. No, I have not been talking to the ISPs in India, and do not understand the situation really well. However I have heard remarks that, even after many years of setting up of India's national Internet exchange NIXI, a very larger part of the domestic traffic still gets routed from outside back to India. It appears to me that compulsory exchange of traffic, on open peering basis, with zero settlement charges, would be good for an open and competitive Internet ecology. I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on requester pays. Possibly, some kind of hybrid model which takes into account 'an overall framework' of actual cost and benefit accruing among different sized ISPs may be possible to evolve. (Of course, any kind of sender pays system is taboo, as it contorts the very structure of the Internet.) I do think that some amount of public interest regulation is requiredat the transport layer of the Internetto keep the Internet as a really open system, as was in the case with telephone traffic exchanged at PSTNs, although the dynamics and thus the needed remedies in the case of the Internet are different. The content/ applications layer however is a completely different ball game and does not require similar 'public utility' kind of regulatory attention. (There can however be issues when some application providers becomes the monopoly provider of some basic digital enablement or facilities. However the point of departure for the required legal/ regulatory attention in such cases would be different - for instance, like the current US FTC investigations into Google's search engine practices.) Regards parminder On Saturday 20 October 2012 05:41 PM, Alejandro Pisanty wrote: > Parminder, > > Market power and large asymmetries in traffic are indeed a serious > factor in this. Lots of good bilateral agreements between ISPs and > good engineering go far in optimizing traffic in absence of an IXP. > Forcing interconnection by law or government action seems tempting but > bites back hard; need to collect case studies for further analysis. > Are you talking to ISPs close by or do you have a study for India? > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > Enviado desde/Sent from BlackBerry® > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NUMERO DE TELEFONO > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > +525541444475 DESDE MEXICO > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From: * parminder > *Sender: * > *Date: *Sat, 20 Oct 2012 17:05:22 +0530 > *To: * > *ReplyTo: * , parminder > > *Subject: *Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > > Isnt one (biggest?) of the reasons of failures of most public interest > IXPs is that there is no regulatory mechanism to ensure that traffic > is exchanged at given national or regional exchanges, like there is > for telephones. For which reason big ISPs/ carriers simply refuse to > exchange traffic with the smaller ones in order to keep the market > power advantage and not allow a level playing field. Just curious to know. > > parminder > > > > On Friday 19 October 2012 11:38 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote: >> Thank you, Dawit, for this clarification that helps find answers to my >> questions. >> >> Mawaki >> >> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> As the implementer of the African Union's African Internet Exchange System >>> (AXIS) project under which this workshop in Gambia is organized, I would >>> like to give some information on this particular workshop and the AXIS >>> project in general. The AXIS project is an African Union project that aims >>> at promoting the development of IXPs around Africa. The first phase of the >>> project consists of organizing IXP Best practice workshops in 30 African >>> countries where there is no IXP followed by technical workshops in these >>> same countries. The Internet Society has been selected by the African >>> Regional Bureau to implement this phase in a period of 2 years. I have >>> attached a press release concerning AXIS (sorry the website is not ready >>> yet). >>> >>> The African Union and indeed the Internet society are conscious that setting >>> up an IXP is not an end by itself and there are many IXPs that never took >>> off from the ground. This is why the Best Practice workshops will discuss >>> about what works and what doesn't work based one the experiences of IXPs in >>> Africa ad around the world. The facilitators that we send to these workshops >>> have practical experience in developing IXPs and can advise the stakeholders >>> invited at the workshops on the way forward. >>> >>> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country >>> follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the >>> African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We >>> organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina >>> Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops >>> in the coming two months: >>> >>> Namibia 23 - 25 October >>> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >>> Niger 6-8 November >>> Benin 13-15 November >>> >>> Most countries where we have organized the workshops have adopted a clear >>> plan to set-up an IXP within a few months and established task forces to >>> that effect, as in the case of the Gambia. >>> >>> Finally, AXIS is not an isolated program but part of a holistic ICT >>> development plan for Africa (African Regional Action Plan on the Knowledge >>> Economy -ARAPKE). AXIS is one of the 11 flagship projects of the ARAPKE >>> (attached description). >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Dawit Bekele >>> Director, African Regional Bureau >>> Internet Society >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >>>> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Mawaki Chango >>>> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 1:33 PM >>>> To:governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>> >>>> Thanks, Jean-Louis! That was part of the reason why I was surprised an IXP >>> in >>>> Africa would make such headline still today, and why I was wondering about >>>> any integrated strategy from the part of AU. Without a vision that takes >>> into >>>> account elements you have outlined, it's hard to appreciate real, long >>> term >>>> progress. >>>> >>>> In your view, what are we missing right now in order to develop a >>>> "consistent, survivable network" keeping in mind that Africa is a huge >>> place >>>> where policy is mainly made through government planning, etc.? >>>> Where does it make more sense to start from --both technically and >>>> strategically-- in order to realize that "minimum of consistency" >>>> which can make any subsequent efforts more efficient? I think any long >>> term >>>> advocacy effort in Africa should itself be led by a vision of this kind, >>> where >>>> policy goals are well informed by technology capabilities and best >>> practices, >>>> and then try to win over policy-makers to it. >>>> >>>> A whole other challenge is, of course, to get policy-makers and any >>>> incumbent stakeholders to embrace the notion (and reality) of creative >>>> destruction, which has never been a given in any place at any era. >>>> Here I can only think of CS using a range of strategies and tactics and >>> sharing >>>> information globally in order to help shape the events and try to shift >>> the >>>> power dynamics. >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> >>>> Mawaki >>>> otherwise Africa Internet Policy coordinator at APC, the one and only >>>> Association for Progressive Communications :) >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 3:36 AM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK >>> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Dear members of the list >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The basic issue in Africa isn't the lack of IXPs, since there are >>>>> around thirty ones. Of course this number is to be extended and >>>>> spatial distribution is to be improved, and the Gambia IXP is a step >>>>> in this direction. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But there is a lack of appropriate networks at the national, regional >>>>> and continental level. In most cases there are a more or less >>>>> continuous series of optical fiber or microwave routes but not a >>>>> consistent, survivable network. This strongly limits the very >>>>> functions of the IXPs i.e. switching, routing and thereby maintaining >>>>> IP traffic that is exchanged in specific spaces (country, sub-region, >>>>> part of African continent) in their respective limits, saving high >>>>> costs of transiting through out-of-Africa Internet nodes and >>> consequently >>>> bandwidth waste on international routes. >>>>> >>>>> Finally, there are severe power issues in most countries that limit >>>>> seriously the availability of both the IXPs and the interconnecting >>>>> network(s). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Of course, some progress has been done for improving this situation >>>>> but the >>>>> (expensive) efforts lack a minimum of consistency and therefore take >>>>> too much time for being efficient. Reponsibility for this >>>>> mismanagement is mainly the neoliberal ruling that promotes hard >>>>> competition instead of genuine networking, but also the African Union >>>>> and the ITU, despite the n°1 and 2 of which are Africans. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best regards >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Jean-Louis Fullsack >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Message du 18/10/12 21:10 >>>>>> De : "David Conrad" >>>>>> A :governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>>> Copie à : >>>>>> Objet : Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Norbert, >>>>>> On Oct 18, 2012, at 12:18 PM, Norbert Klein wrote: >>>>>>> I thought it was also interesting that this effort of ISOC is >>>>>>> reported here by Xinhua via the China Daily. Maybe an indication >>>>>>> that the internationally experienced and active hardware supplier >>>>>>> Huawei will help the Banjul efforts, and whoever will by trained >>>>>>> with the experience of ISOC when new IXP will be set up in more >>> places >>>> in Africa. >>>>>> My understanding is that the training (done by folks from ISOC >>>>>> partnering with AfriNIC and other Africa-based organizations is >>>>>> technology neutral. I'm told by one of the folks involved in Gambia >>>>>> that they expect the IXP to be set up in 6 months or so. As far as I >>>>>> know, there hasn't been any decision on hardware in the IXP. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards, >>>>>> -drc >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________ >>>> __ >>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> __________________________________________________________ >>>> __ >>>>> 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 11:35:28 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 21:05:28 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Message-ID: Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters. How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? -C On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > > > Isn't this a joke : > > > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the > following activities: > > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to > support cloud computing. > > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and > reducing the digital divide. > > > > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in > African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries > of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking > in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't > laugh at all ! > > > > Best > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > > > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > > De : "parminder" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Copie à : > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > Internet Economy > > > > > > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > > > > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting > of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in > Washington, D.C. > > > > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > > > > > From the agreement text: > > > > > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the > “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication > Technology Services. > > > > > > SNIP > > > > > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the > following activities: > > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to > support cloud computing. > > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and > reducing the digital divide. > > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud > computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > > > > (quotes end) > > > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the > Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. > Industry reps too want them to develop '*international *framework to > support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing > countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these > global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these > developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry > (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same > kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG > civil society. > > > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of > developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up > the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. > They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by > the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil > society. > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up > with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. > > > > parminder > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fahd > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 13:32:56 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 13:32:56 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting > of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in > Washington, D.C. > > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > > From the agreement text: > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the > “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication > Technology Services. > > > SNIP > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the > following activities: > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to > support cloud computing. > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and > reducing the digital divide. > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud > computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > > > (quotes end) > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the > Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. > Industry reps too want them to develop '*international *framework to > support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing > countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made > This article, while certainly out of date given the recent detente twixt ICANN and Minister Pilot discusses the birth of CIRP at some length: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2220692/How-India-helped-bunch-bureaucrats-custodians-Internet.html It doesn't sound like there was a whole lot of MSism going on, at least not the kind of MSism I have witnessed. -- 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: -------------- 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 From d.r.newman at e-consultation.org Mon Oct 22 13:52:54 2012 From: d.r.newman at e-consultation.org (D. R. Newman) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 18:52:54 +0100 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <508587F6.1030103@e-consultation.org> In addition to the countries Dawit lists, does anyone know when an IXP will be set up Sierra Leone? The undersea cable came aground a year ago, but people are still waiting for connections from that to ISPs in Sierra Leone, despite the government having received two loans totalling $46 million. David Newman (trying to work out when e-learning will be practical in Sierra Leone). On 19/10/12 14:07, Dawit Bekele wrote: > As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every country > follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet Society and the > African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the steps to take. We > organized these workshops in four countries in the last two months: Burkina > Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will organize the following workshops > in the coming two months: > > Namibia 23 - 25 October > Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 > Niger 6-8 November > Benin 13-15 November -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 14:02:21 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:02:21 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:22 AM, parminder wrote: > > Dear Alejandro, > > Thanks for your response. > > No, I have not been talking to the ISPs in India, and do not understand > the situation really well. However I have heard remarks that, even after > many years of setting up of India's national Internet exchange NIXI, a very > larger part of the domestic traffic still gets routed from outside back to > India. > Some of that maybe due to Traffic engineering. If it is cheaper to send traffic to AMS-IX or LINX than NIXI, folk will do that, even though it means that traffic goes to the EU and comes back. > > It appears to me that compulsory exchange of traffic, on open peering > basis, with zero settlement charges, would be good for an open and > competitive Internet ecology. > Except that of course you have just turned paying customers into peers, dramatically reducing revenue and doing nearly as much damage to the Internet charging system as "sending party network pays" would. > I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on > requester pays. > This would be very surprising indeed. Do you have a link? > I do think that some amount of public interest regulation is required at > the transport layer of the Internet to keep the Internet as a really open > system > read the article Alx just sent you. I think you will change your mind. -- 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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 14:05:01 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:05:01 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <61699342-1350918507-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-40569888-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> <61699342-1350918507-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-40569888-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:08 AM, Alejandro Pisanty wrote: > Parminder, > > 1. This will help you (re "not understanding really well" re IXP > situation): > > > http://oecdinsights.org/2012/10/22/internet-traffic-exchange-2-billion-users-and-its-done-on-a-handshake/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=internet-traffic-exchange-2-billion-users-and-its-done-on-a-handshake > > Includes reference to silent good work of engineers I mentioned > previously. > > 2. Re traffic going out of India and back, measure, measure! > Here are some NIXI measurements: http://www.nixi.in/en/mrtg-statistics You can click on each location to see traffic across the switch fabric at each location by Hourly/Weekly/Monthly/yearly. -- 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Mon Oct 22 15:06:00 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 19:06:00 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12>, Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Chaitanya, let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 processors.) The key to the design was that the communication between the computers would never be more than an order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so we would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched computing power for big science problems like computerized fluid dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several hundred engineers we would have. Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before blaming it all on them? Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters" while "they" can? Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 10:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK CC: parminder Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters. How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? -C On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > wrote: Isn't this a joke : ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! Best Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > De : "parminder" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > From the agreement text: > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. > > SNIP > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > (quotes end) > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. > > parminder > > > > > > > > Fahd > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Mon Oct 22 15:56:07 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:56:07 -0700 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Message-ID: <0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> Hi, On Oct 22, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. Actually, the "fastest clouds" are the ones that are closest (network topologically) to you. Tying two threads together, I'd think "local" cloud service providers deploying at in-country IXPs would likely out-perform any cloud service provider at the other end of a long fiber (or worse, satellite connection). Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Mon Oct 22 16:09:22 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 20:09:22 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> ,<0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2694@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> David, as mentioned in recent discussions, that indeed seems to be a trend, a kind of "new breed" IXPs which are becoming attractive as points of presence of aggregated traffic, so Google, Akamai, and others are using them the same way they would ISPs - in some cases with no money exchanged, or only the membership in the otherwise non-profit IXP. The ISPs gain in that their routes and bandwidth to these providers become less expensive, so the ROI on the investment in becoming members of the IXP and paying for fiber to the IXP is promising. I don't think this equation is fully worked out but I see associations forming on this premise. Mind you, the stats I know are that an NREN has 30% of its traffic to Google (Gmail, Google search, YouTube, etc.) so this also means that the local content providers are falling short in capturing a market. One more clarion call to do the in-country work for real. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de David Conrad [drc at virtualized.org] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 14:56 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Hi, On Oct 22, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. Actually, the "fastest clouds" are the ones that are closest (network topologically) to you. Tying two threads together, I'd think "local" cloud service providers deploying at in-country IXPs would likely out-perform any cloud service provider at the other end of a long fiber (or worse, satellite connection). Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From kerry at kdbsystems.com Mon Oct 22 16:31:47 2012 From: kerry at kdbsystems.com (Kerry Brown) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 20:31:47 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2694@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> ,<0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2694@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: In Canada we only have two IXPs and one transit exchange. Because the US is so close the ISPs find it cheaper to go to the US. Almost all Canadian Internet traffic flows through the US at some point. This is becoming an issue because of things like the Patriot Act. This also makes it hard for small ISPs to get good access to content providers. CIRA (I am on their board) is in the early stages of bootstrapping several not for profit IXPs across Canada very much on the model that Alejandro talks about here. My understanding is that this model is quite common in Europe. http://cira.ca/news/ixp Kerry Brown > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > Sent: October-22-12 1:09 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; David Conrad > Subject: RE: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > Internet Economy > > David, > > as mentioned in recent discussions, that indeed seems to be a trend, a kind > of "new breed" IXPs which are becoming attractive as points of presence of > aggregated traffic, so Google, Akamai, and others are using them the same > way they would ISPs - in some cases with no money exchanged, or only the > membership in the otherwise non-profit IXP. > > The ISPs gain in that their routes and bandwidth to these providers become > less expensive, so the ROI on the investment in becoming members of the > IXP and paying for fiber to the IXP is promising. I don't think this equation is > fully worked out but I see associations forming on this premise. > > Mind you, the stats I know are that an NREN has 30% of its traffic to Google > (Gmail, Google search, YouTube, etc.) so this also means that the local > content providers are falling short in capturing a market. One more clarion > call to do the in-country work for real. > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > ________________________________________ > Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de David Conrad > [drc at virtualized.org] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 14:56 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > Internet Economy > > Hi, > > On Oct 22, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar > wrote: > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the > most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" > will go: to the most developed countries. > > Actually, the "fastest clouds" are the ones that are closest (network > topologically) to you. Tying two threads together, I'd think "local" cloud > service providers deploying at in-country IXPs would likely out-perform any > cloud service provider at the other end of a long fiber (or worse, satellite > connection). > > Regards, > -drc > > -------------- 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 From katitza at eff.org Mon Oct 22 20:34:02 2012 From: katitza at eff.org (Katitza Rodriguez) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 02:34:02 +0200 Subject: [governance] Dutch government proposes cyberattacks against... everyone In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> ,<0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2694@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <5085E5FA.3010301@eff.org> Dutch government proposes cyberattacks against... everyone https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/dutch-government-proposes-cyberattacks-against-everyone -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 22:08:24 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 07:38:24 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: Hi Alex, I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or anything else) here - its just that even when these facilities are provided and available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par with Softlayer in most ways - except most importantly it's location. End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and without the revenue stream even the best won't be *able to *be there very long. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan at unam.mx> wrote: > Chaitanya, > > let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. > > Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in Mexico > I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the Metropolitan > Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three supercomputers at high > speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 processors.) The key to the > design was that the communication between the computers would never be more > than an order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so we > would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched computing > power for big science problems like computerized fluid dynamics, quantum > chemistry, etc. > > This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to > train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud > computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for > several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's > beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do > things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the > subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, > bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. > > Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got to > train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several > hundred engineers we would have. > > Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit > that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before > blaming it all on them? > > Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable > datacenters" while "they" can? > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > ------------------------------ > *Desde:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Chaitanya Dhareshwar [ > chaitanyabd at gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 10:35 > *Hasta:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK > *CC:* parminder > *Asunto:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on > the Internet Economy > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be > in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing > investment" will go: to the most developed countries. > > Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network > speeds and stable datacenters. > > How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? > > -C > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK < > jlfullsack at orange.fr> wrote: > >> >> >> Isn't this a joke : >> >> >> >> ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the >> following activities: >> >> > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework >> to support cloud computing. >> >> > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and >> reducing the digital divide. >> >> >> >> Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in >> African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries >> of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking >> in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't >> laugh at all ! >> >> >> >> Best >> >> >> >> Jean-Louis Fullsack >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 >> > De : "parminder" >> > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> > Copie à : >> > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on >> the Internet Economy >> >> > >> > >> > >> On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: >> > >> >> The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level >> meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet >> Economy in Washington, D.C. >> > >> > >> http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy >> > >> >> >> > From the agreement text: >> > >> > >> >> Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the >> “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication >> Technology Services. >> > >> >> >> > SNIP >> > >> > >> >> ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the >> following activities: >> >> > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework >> to support cloud computing. >> >> > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and >> reducing the digital divide. >> >> > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud >> computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. >> >> >> > (quotes end) >> > >> > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for >> the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. >> Industry reps too want them to develop '*international *framework to >> support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing >> countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... >> > >> > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these >> global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these >> developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry >> (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same >> kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG >> civil society. >> > >> > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of >> developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up >> the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. >> They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by >> the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil >> society. >> > >> > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the >> active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy >> principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global >> Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up >> with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. >> > >> > parminder >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > Fahd >> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 22:26:43 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 07:56:43 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> Message-ID: Hi David, Yes the network latency is the lowest - wasnt talking about that one - however the same system with the same setup would cost more, and the belief that investing in buying/leasing a cloud system from a developed country always has it's own 'charm'. As for satellite setups - unless the satellite network concerned has a primary routing hub in the country concerned, we're still talking cross-country traffic for a supposedly local setup. For example (fact) - VSAT in India - our traffic is routed via one of our neighbouring countries - so the speed of connecting to a website/server/etc in THAT country is about 200ms faster than connecting to one in India. Either way for the same $ invested, the fastest cloud would still be in the most developed countries, moreso if they have been investing actively in computing infra (since they will likely get better costs for their new setups). Even if they do outperform. Unless there's an SLA written in blood who would give them a chance? And like I'd said earlier in my response to Alex - without a customer base how long will they survive? Or even if they survive how will they be able to keep pace with the 'developed' country DCs? Scenario currently: No one, no way, no how. Will the IXPs change this? Yes they definitely will. The question is whether the change be at an effective pace (time+cost+roi+performance)? IMHO we'll still have people taking servers in the US/UK/etc because: 1. Cost per unit server is less 2. Reputed ISP/DC 3. 'Closer to our Customers' - a point that works for most people here in India. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 1:26 AM, David Conrad wrote: > Hi, > > On Oct 22, 2012, at 8:35 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar > wrote: > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in > the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing > investment" will go: to the most developed countries. > > Actually, the "fastest clouds" are the ones that are closest (network > topologically) to you. Tying two threads together, I'd think "local" cloud > service providers deploying at in-country IXPs would likely out-perform any > cloud service provider at the other end of a long fiber (or worse, > satellite connection). > > Regards, > -drc > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Mon Oct 22 22:31:24 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:01:24 +0530 Subject: [governance] Dutch government proposes cyberattacks against... everyone In-Reply-To: <5085E5FA.3010301@eff.org> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <0E0E81CF-37DF-493E-AD83-1EFF9A5A3C99@virtualized.org> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2694@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <5085E5FA.3010301@eff.org> Message-ID: It's a joke. Hopefully. A member EU planning cyberwar would be disastrous. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:04 AM, Katitza Rodriguez wrote: > Dutch government proposes cyberattacks against... everyone > > https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/**2012/10/dutch-government-** > proposes-cyberattacks-against-**everyone > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Tue Oct 23 00:57:09 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 04:57:09 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Chaitanya, thanks! so, not much of an Internet Governance aspect to this issue left. On to the next one. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 21:08 Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Hi Alex, I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or anything else) here - its just that even when these facilities are provided and available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par with Softlayer in most ways - except most importantly it's location. End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and without the revenue stream even the best won't be able to be there very long. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > wrote: Chaitanya, let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 processors.) The key to the design was that the communication between the computers would never be more than an order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so we would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched computing power for big science problems like computerized fluid dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several hundred engineers we would have. Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before blaming it all on them? Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters" while "they" can? Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 10:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK CC: parminder Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters. How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? -C On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > wrote: Isn't this a joke : ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! Best Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > De : "parminder" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > From the agreement text: > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. > > SNIP > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > (quotes end) > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. > > parminder > > > > > > > > Fahd > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Oct 23 04:07:18 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:37:18 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> Alejandro/ Chaitanya, On Tuesday 23 October 2012 10:27 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > Chaitanya, > > thanks! so, not much of an Internet Governance aspect to this issue left. In fact, the primary internet 'Governance' question posed in my initial posting remains and has not been addressed at all, with the discussion swerving towards operational issues. I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. And since Alejandro mentions 'ugly imperialists' , I will like to say that it is in unilaterally imposing governance frameworks developed by rich countries over the whole world that 'ugly imperialism' comes in. You do all the governance work, and if developing countries want to do it, call them as despots out to control the Internet, and for good measure, co-opt a willing civil society into the game. parminder > On to the next one. > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Desde:* Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 21:08 > *Hasta:* Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > *CC:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Asunto:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on > the Internet Economy > > Hi Alex, > I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or > anything else) here - its just that even when these facilities are > provided and available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par > with Softlayer in most ways - except most importantly it's location. > End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and > ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and > without the revenue stream even the best won't be /able to /be there > very long. > -C > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > > wrote: > > Chaitanya, > > let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real > world. > > Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in > Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the > Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three > supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, > 1,300 processors.) The key to the design was that the > communication between the computers would never be more than an > order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so > we would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched > computing power for big science problems like computerized fluid > dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. > > This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great > place to train people in grids and a stepping stone toward > provisioning cloud computing. The project was authorized but the > funds were not released for several years (in the meantime I left > that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's beginning to work because it > took years to go across the regulations to do things like dig > trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the subway > to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. > Inefficiency, bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all > played a role. > > Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never > got to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, > the several hundred engineers we would have. > > Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we > admit that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own > to wash before blaming it all on them? > > Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and > stable datacenters" while "they" can? > > Alejandro Pisanty > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Desde:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > > [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > ] en nombre de > Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com > ] > *Enviado el:* lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 10:35 > *Hasta:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > ; Jean-Louis FULLSACK > *CC:* parminder > *Asunto:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation > Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would > be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud > computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. > Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent > network speeds and stable datacenters. > How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? > -C > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > > wrote: > > Isn't this a joke : > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested > the following activities: > > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international > framework to support cloud computing. > > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing > countries and reducing the digital divide. > > > > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were > staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! > I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries > with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in > Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at > all ! > > Best > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > > De : "parminder" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > > Copie à : > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation > Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > > > > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > > > > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director > General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy > Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in > Washington, D.C. > > > > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > > > > > From the agreement text: > > > > > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles > consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade > Principles for Information and Communication > Technology Services. > > > > > > SNIP > > > > > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives > suggested the following activities: > > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an > international framework to support cloud computing. > > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing > countries and reducing the digital divide. > > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: > privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, > interoperability, and portability. > > > > (quotes end) > > > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' > principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other > countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want > them to develop '/*international */framework to support > cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in > developing countries, and to consider a range of policy > issues.... > > > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to > address these global Internet policy issues at globally > democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, > most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here > seen actively encouraging developed countries to do > exactly the same kind of work), and also, most > disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop > being the B team of developed countries' political and > economic interests and really take up the interests of the > more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They > need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be > championed by the civil society, which looks like > something worth championing by civil society. > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent > with regard to the active work of rich countries to > develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so > rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet > policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, > come up with something else. But the complicit silence is > deafening. > > > > parminder > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fahd > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Tue Oct 23 04:28:51 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:28:51 +0200 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:07 AM, parminder wrote: > > Alejandro/ Chaitanya, > > I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework > to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and > developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. > > parminder > Namaste Parminder, A very old strategy: divide and rule. Happy day, Louis -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fahd.batayneh at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 05:47:31 2012 From: fahd.batayneh at gmail.com (Fahd A. Batayneh) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:47:31 +0300 Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years Message-ID: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/17/tech/mobile/ibm-digital-divide-gahran/index.html Interesting... Fahd -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ian.peter at ianpeter.com Tue Oct 23 06:09:05 2012 From: ian.peter at ianpeter.com (Ian Peter) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:09:05 +1100 Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2F35A1BF584840B8877C49CFE04235A1@Toshiba> I wouldn’t put a great deal of weight on IBM predictions. Some of their best past predictions include that the world would only ever need 13 computers, and that USA users would never use mobile phones for texting, information services etc because this was a peculiar Japanese fetish that would never take off in the west. I think the prediction of the end of the digital divide ranks with these other two examples. Ian Peter From: Fahd A. Batayneh Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 8:47 PM To: IG Caucus Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/17/tech/mobile/ibm-digital-divide-gahran/index.html Interesting... Fahd -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 06:31:35 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:31:35 +1200 Subject: [governance] OFCOM: Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report Message-ID: Dear All, OFCOM just released this Report today and I thought that you might find it interesting: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/oct2012/main.pdf Kind Regards, -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Tue Oct 23 06:32:34 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 16:02:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50867242.5040403@itforchange.net> On Monday 22 October 2012 11:32 PM, McTim wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:22 AM, parminder > wrote: > > snip > > I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on > requester pays. > > > > This would be very surprising indeed. Do you have a link? McTim Here is the link. http://www.nixi.in/en/routing-and-tarrif-policy parminder -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Tue Oct 23 07:16:00 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:16:00 +0200 Subject: [governance] OECD References: Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4E9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/fulltext/5k918gpt130q.pdf?expires=1350991840&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=1BEDFA489C095015053C0921D1FEBE63 FYI w -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 08:12:11 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 17:42:11 +0530 Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years In-Reply-To: <2F35A1BF584840B8877C49CFE04235A1@Toshiba> References: <2F35A1BF584840B8877C49CFE04235A1@Toshiba> Message-ID: That was 5 computers - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/21/computing.supercomputers It's like Gates saying "640K Ram should be enough for everyone" But yes why do they make such silly statements? And they're the ones in the forefront of computing (facepalm) -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Ian Peter wrote: > I wouldn’t put a great deal of weight on IBM predictions. Some of their > best past predictions include that the world would only ever need 13 > computers, and that USA users would never use mobile phones for texting, > information services etc because this was a peculiar Japanese fetish that > would never take off in the west. > > I think the prediction of the end of the digital divide ranks with these > other two examples. > > Ian Peter > > *From:* Fahd A. Batayneh > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 23, 2012 8:47 PM > *To:* IG Caucus > *Subject:* [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 > Years > > > http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/17/tech/mobile/ibm-digital-divide-gahran/index.html > > Interesting... > > Fahd > > ------------------------------ > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 08:11:45 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:11:45 +0300 Subject: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM Message-ID: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM Posted: 10/22/2012 4:36 pm EDT Updated: 10/22/2012 4:41 pm Linn's story, which appeared on Bekkelund's blog on Monday, has already triggered a heated discussion about ebooks and digital rights management (DRM), with some calling this Amazon incident an example of DRM at its worst. "[The incident] highlights the power [DRM] offers blue-chip companies . DRM is used by hardware manufacturers and publishers to limit the use of digital content once it has been purchased by consumers; in Amazon's case, it means the company can prevent you from reading content you have bought at the Kindle store on a rival device," the Guardian writes. This is not the first time that Amazon has remotely erased Kindle content. As Andy Boxall of Digital Trends notes, the company deleted copies of "Animal Farm" and "1984" in 2009. It also occured in 2010, "when more dubious titles were removed too." "Amazon should not be able to erase content that has already been downloaded . If the company wants to close your account, fine; refuse future downloads. But unless it has proof that the books on that Kindle had been fraudulently downloaded, we don't see how the company can justify erasing content that had been paid for by a customer," the Consumerist notes, adding that Amazon had yet to respond to a request for comment. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 08:47:03 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:47:03 +0300 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?Greens_Call_For_=91Social_Contract_?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?For_Digital_Age=92=3B_Lessig_Calls_US_Hopeless_On_Copyri?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?ght_Reform?= Message-ID: <508691C7.3060805@gmail.com> [ Greens Call For ‘Social Contract For Digital Age’; Lessig Calls US Hopeless On Copyright Reform Published on 22 October 2012 @ 10:04 pm Print This Post Print This Post Intellectual Property Watch By Monika Ermert for /Intellectual Property Watch/ BERLIN–The United States is hopeless when it comes to a copyright reform for the internet, US Law Professor Lawrence Lessig told the German Green Party’s congress on internet politics on Saturday. Europe, Lessig said, could take the lead with regard to that reform, which is needed but blocked in the US by vested interests. The US copyright lobby’s only defeat – the withdrawal of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) – did not mean there was a broader turnaround, he said. Lessig asked for a simpler, more focussed and efficient copyright that avoids mixing private and professional use, remix and copies under an ever-stricter regime. The call was welcomed at the conference that the Green Party used to discuss what it called a social contract for the digital age. “A social contract for the digital age is overdue,” said Green Party Chair Renate Kuenast, who will also lead the party in the upcoming German election next year. Needed elements are: internet access as the new universal service, better access to the political process and a rejuvenation of democracy, and the protection of fundamental rights in the digital world, Kuenast said. Eighteen workshops discussed what critics called regulation for the net – from more effective data protection to potential inclusion of digital rights in the German constitution. Former State Department official Ben Scott called for much more forward-looking policy and said he sees Berlin as more of a source for the change than Brussels and the European Union, as Brussels is where “good ideas go to die.” -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: printer_famfamfam.gif Type: image/gif Size: 1035 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Tue Oct 23 09:29:52 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:29:52 +0200 Subject: [governance] UNODC References: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4E9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4F1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf fyi w -------------- 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 From bekele at isoc.org Tue Oct 23 11:24:04 2012 From: bekele at isoc.org (Dawit Bekele) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:24:04 +0300 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <508587F6.1030103@e-consultation.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <508587F6.1030103@e-consultation.org> Message-ID: <046601cdb132$79a32ab0$6ce98010$@isoc.org> Hi David, An IXP was set-up in Sierra Leone last year. But I believe not many ISPs are peering there for the moment. Best regards, Dawit > -----Original Message----- > From: D. R. Newman [mailto:d.r.newman at e-consultation.org] > Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:53 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dawit Bekele > Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point > > In addition to the countries Dawit lists, does anyone know when an IXP will > be set up Sierra Leone? The undersea cable came aground a year ago, but > people are still waiting for connections from that to ISPs in Sierra Leone, > despite the government having received two loans totalling $46 million. > > David Newman (trying to work out when e-learning will be practical in Sierra > Leone). > > On 19/10/12 14:07, Dawit Bekele wrote: > > As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every > > country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet > > Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the > > steps to take. We organized these workshops in four countries in the > > last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will > > organize the following workshops in the coming two months: > > > > Namibia 23 - 25 October > > Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 > > Niger 6-8 November > > Benin 13-15 November -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 11:33:16 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:03:16 +0530 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <046601cdb132$79a32ab0$6ce98010$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <508587F6.1030103@e-consultation.org> <046601cdb132$79a32ab0$6ce98010$@isoc.org> Message-ID: How much of that is due to ISPs having satellite rather than submarine cable connectivity, and how much due to inter ISP politics? :) --srs (iPad) On 23-Oct-2012, at 20:54, "Dawit Bekele" wrote: > Hi David, > > An IXP was set-up in Sierra Leone last year. But I believe not many ISPs are peering there for the moment. > > Best regards, > Dawit > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: D. R. Newman [mailto:d.r.newman at e-consultation.org] >> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:53 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dawit Bekele >> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> In addition to the countries Dawit lists, does anyone know when an IXP will >> be set up Sierra Leone? The undersea cable came aground a year ago, but >> people are still waiting for connections from that to ISPs in Sierra Leone, >> despite the government having received two loans totalling $46 million. >> >> David Newman (trying to work out when e-learning will be practical in Sierra >> Leone). >> >> On 19/10/12 14:07, Dawit Bekele wrote: >>> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every >>> country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet >>> Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the >>> steps to take. We organized these workshops in four countries in the >>> last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will >>> organize the following workshops in the coming two months: >>> >>> Namibia 23 - 25 October >>> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >>> Niger 6-8 November >>> Benin 13-15 November > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From drc at virtualized.org Tue Oct 23 11:47:03 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:47:03 -0700 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <6E7440CB-057A-4039-BE3E-126F94BD06CD@virtualized.org> On Oct 23, 2012, at 1:07 AM, parminder wrote: > I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and developing - together do it? Because it was a meeting between the US and Japan, not all countries? > And since Alejandro mentions 'ugly imperialists' , I will like to say that it is in unilaterally imposing governance frameworks developed by rich countries over the whole world that 'ugly imperialism' comes in. How exactly does two countries having talks and coming out with a statement saying they agree to a couple of things and that they'll take those things to other fora "unilaterally impose governance frameworks ... over the whole world"? Is there anything stopping sets of other countries from coming up with their own frameworks and taking them to Dubai too? Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From judith at jhellerstein.com Tue Oct 23 11:47:24 2012 From: judith at jhellerstein.com (Judith Hellerstein) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:47:24 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <046601cdb132$79a32ab0$6ce98010$@isoc.org> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <508587F6.1030103@e-consultation.org> <046601cdb132$79a32ab0$6ce98010$@isoc.org> Message-ID: <5086BC0C.9020702@jhellerstein.com> Hi David, Although the cable has landed, it has not been activated yet and traffic is not flowing. This is expected before the end of December, but could be delayed yet again. I would expect next year you will see a change. Also the regulatory and legal situation is not yet resolved. I am working on a World Bank Project there so know very much the timeline and what is holding things back. The delays in the activation of the ACE Cable has led to delays in resolving the legal and regulatory situation and this in turn has led to a delay in the new markets for ICT. Once the cable is activated and the regulatory and legal situation is more established, which should happen within the year, you should see a growth in this market and it would be possible to establish and maintain an IXP and have other carriers peer with it. Best, Judith Hellerstein _________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein E-mail: Judith at jhellerstein.com Website: www.jhellerstein.com Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide On 10/23/12 11:24 AM, Dawit Bekele wrote: > Hi David, > > An IXP was set-up in Sierra Leone last year. But I believe not many ISPs are peering there for the moment. > > Best regards, > Dawit > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: D. R. Newman [mailto:d.r.newman at e-consultation.org] >> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 8:53 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dawit Bekele >> Subject: Re: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point >> >> In addition to the countries Dawit lists, does anyone know when an IXP will >> be set up Sierra Leone? The undersea cable came aground a year ago, but >> people are still waiting for connections from that to ISPs in Sierra Leone, >> despite the government having received two loans totalling $46 million. >> >> David Newman (trying to work out when e-learning will be practical in Sierra >> Leone). >> >> On 19/10/12 14:07, Dawit Bekele wrote: >>> As David rightly mentioned the training is technology neutral. Every >>> country follows its own pace in developing the IXPs. The Internet >>> Society and the African Union can only advise the stakeholders on the >>> steps to take. We organized these workshops in four countries in the >>> last two months: Burkina Faso, Burundi, Senegal and Gambia. We will >>> organize the following workshops in the coming two months: >>> >>> Namibia 23 - 25 October >>> Guinea 30 Oct- Nov 1 >>> Niger 6-8 November >>> Benin 13-15 November > -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 11:51:44 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 11:51:44 -0400 Subject: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM In-Reply-To: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> References: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> Message-ID: I am still very confused by Amazon's attitude towards the IP address I am using at any point in time. Last year I was given a Kindle which was probably purchased locally (in Saint Lucia, West Indies) or in the United States. Initially I made purchases for it from my existing Amazon.uk account, but then was re-directed to Amazon.com. Amazon.com lists different books, and anyway they don't like my credit card (issued in Barbados) so I declined to go. That Kindle was stolen, but obligingly blocked for further use through my Amazon UK account. In April I was in England where I was given a new Kindle, this time bought in the UK Using the Internet in the house where I was staying in London I discovered with joy that I could retrieve all of the content from the stolen Kindle - through my Amazon UK account. I bought several books as well as some other things - through my Amazon UK account and was, as they say, happy as Larry - until I got home to Saint Lucia and found myself redirected to Amazon.com for things to do with my Kindle. The single thing that varies is the IP address I am working from, and I ask again - is that IP address any business of Amazon? Have I somehow become my IP address? Is it of more importance than everything else - including the billing address for my credit card? Where does my personal privacy stand in this context? I have asked the question before - also from Amazon - but I'm still not convinced by the answers. Can anyone un-confuse me please? Deirdre. On 23 October 2012 08:11, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > > Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion > About Ebooks, DRM > > Posted: 10/22/2012 4:36 pm EDT Updated: 10/22/2012 4:41 pm > > Linn's story, which appeared on Bekkelund's blog on Monday, has already > triggered a heated discussionabout ebooks and digital rights management (DRM), with some calling this > Amazon incident an example of DRM at its worst. > > "[The incident] highlights the power [DRM] offers blue-chip companies. > DRM is used by hardware manufacturers and publishers to limit the use of > digital content once it has been purchased by consumers; in Amazon's case, > it means the company can prevent you from reading content you have bought > at the Kindle store on a rival device," the Guardian writes. > > This is not the first time that Amazon has remotely erased Kindle content. > > As Andy Boxall of Digital Trendsnotes, the company deleted > copies of "Animal Farm" and "1984"in 2009. It also occured in 2010, "when > more dubious titles were removed too." > > "Amazon should not be able to erase content that has already been > downloaded. > If the company wants to close your account, fine; refuse future downloads. > But unless it has proof that the books on that Kindle had been fraudulently > downloaded, we don’t see how the company can justify erasing content that > had been paid for by a customer," the Consumerist notes, adding that Amazon > had yet to respond to a request for comment. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Tue Oct 23 11:54:01 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:54:01 -0700 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Oct 23, 2012, at 1:28 AM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: >> I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. > A very old strategy: divide and rule. I'm honestly curious: how does an agreement between Japan and the US on cloud computing 'divide and rule' anything? Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 12:08:05 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:38:05 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6E7440CB-057A-4039-BE3E-126F94BD06CD@virtualized.org> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> <6E7440CB-057A-4039-BE3E-126F94BD06CD@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <05F6D468-5B62-4242-A604-3C83249E2C53@hserus.net> As ye ask, so shall ye receive http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2220692/How-India-helped-bunch-bureaucrats-custodians-Internet.html?ito=feeds-newsxml And yes parminder, as the article mentions you, you may want to respond to the reporter --srs (iPad) On 23-Oct-2012, at 21:17, David Conrad wrote: > > Is there anything stopping sets of other countries from coming up with their own frameworks and taking them to Dubai too? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Tue Oct 23 12:21:47 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 09:21:47 -0700 Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years In-Reply-To: References: <2F35A1BF584840B8877C49CFE04235A1@Toshiba> Message-ID: <3B3AA320-631C-4C88-BFB0-C583779FF5D0@virtualized.org> On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:12 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > That was 5 computers - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/21/computing.supercomputers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson#Famous_misquote However, that article you referenced suggests 5 is 4 too many. > It's like Gates saying "640K Ram should be enough for everyone" http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1997/01/1484 (note: potentially offensive language unrelated to the Gates quote towards the end of that article) Bill Gates did however say (in 1989) that Microsoft would never make a 32-bit operating system and that spam would be "a thing of the past in two years time" in 2004. > But yes why do they make such silly statements? And they're the ones in the forefront of computing (facepalm) Making predictions about the future is known to be a bit challenging, e.g., http://listverse.com/2007/10/28/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/ Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From jlfullsack at orange.fr Tue Oct 23 12:36:12 2012 From: jlfullsack at orange.fr (Jean-Louis FULLSACK) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:36:12 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> Message-ID: <1135972384.76452.1351010172856.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e09> Maybe Chaitanya that you're right about digital divide widening due to "high speed clouds". In my opinion this isn't the only threat.    Cloud networking requires a stable and 100% working network, i.e. datacenters inlusive. All network components (equipment, centers, O&M functionalities ...) need a stable and 24/7/365 electricity supply for their feeding. In most countries of Africa electricity supply is problematic, even in large cities. Therefore once you rely on distant SW and Data for working with your terminal (i.e. in the cloud), the risks of a "dark network" is sufficiently important for dissuading you from being cloud enthousiastic ! Not to speak about public services and business communications !   Best   Jean-Louis Fullsack     > Message du 22/10/12 17:36 > De : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" > Copie à : "parminder" > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries.   Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters.   How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)?   -C > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > >   > Isn't this a joke : >   > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > > > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! >   > Best >   > Jean-Louis Fullsack >   >   > > > > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > > De : "parminder" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Copie à : > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. > > > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > > > From the agreement text: > > > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. > > > > SNIP > > > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > > (quotes end) > > > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. > > > > parminder > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Fahd > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 12:52:07 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:22:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Message-ID: Actually you need a regular power supply to operate a p3 running linux mailserver just ad much as you do a "cloud service". A large scale, high userbase service might have more stringent power, bandwidth, server etc requirements than the p3 running linux, but they are both "on the cloud" Let us not define cloud computing even more vaguely than it already is. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" To: , "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" Cc: "parminder" Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Date: Tue, Oct 23, 2012 10:06 PM Maybe Chaitanya that you're right about digital divide widening due to "high speed clouds". In my opinion this isn't the only threat.    Cloud networking requires a stable and 100% working network, i.e. datacenters inlusive. All network components (equipment, centers, O&M functionalities ...) need a stable and 24/7/365 electricity supply for their feeding. In most countries of Africa electricity supply is problematic, even in large cities. Therefore once you rely on distant SW and Data for working with your terminal (i.e. in the cloud), the risks of a "dark network" is sufficiently important for dissuading you from being cloud enthousiastic ! Not to speak about public services and business communications !   Best   Jean-Louis Fullsack     > Message du 22/10/12 17:36 > De : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" > Copie à : "parminder" > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries.   Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters.   How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)?   -C > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > >   > Isn't this a joke : >   > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > > > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! >   > Best >   > Jean-Louis Fullsack >   >   > > > > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > > De : "parminder" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > > Copie à : > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. > > > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > > > From the agreement text: > > > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. > > > > SNIP > > > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > > (quotes end) > > > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 13:21:17 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:51:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years In-Reply-To: <3B3AA320-631C-4C88-BFB0-C583779FF5D0@virtualized.org> References: <2F35A1BF584840B8877C49CFE04235A1@Toshiba> <3B3AA320-631C-4C88-BFB0-C583779FF5D0@virtualized.org> Message-ID: So considering the remarkable inverse accuracy of these statements they should have announced "Digital divide will be around for ever, we guarantee at least 5 years" - and then in 4 years we'd be clean? -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:51 PM, David Conrad wrote: > On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:12 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar > wrote: > > That was 5 computers - > http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/21/computing.supercomputers > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson#Famous_misquote > > However, that article you referenced suggests 5 is 4 too many. > > > It's like Gates saying "640K Ram should be enough for everyone" > > http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1997/01/1484 (note: potentially > offensive language unrelated to the Gates quote towards the end of that > article) > > Bill Gates did however say (in 1989) that Microsoft would never make a > 32-bit operating system and that spam would be "a thing of the past in two > years time" in 2004. > > > But yes why do they make such silly statements? And they're the ones in > the forefront of computing (facepalm) > > Making predictions about the future is known to be a bit challenging, > e.g., > http://listverse.com/2007/10/28/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/ > > Regards, > -drc > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From tracyhackshaw at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 13:36:24 2012 From: tracyhackshaw at gmail.com (Tracy F. Hackshaw @ Google) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 13:36:24 -0400 Subject: [governance] IBM Predicts the End of the Digital Divide in 5 Years In-Reply-To: References: <2F35A1BF584840B8877C49CFE04235A1@Toshiba> <3B3AA320-631C-4C88-BFB0-C583779FF5D0@virtualized.org> Message-ID: Given the expected announcement by Apple in just a few hours from now, this quote/prediction is one of the best in the list that's being compiled here: "Second, I'd like to comment on the avalanche of tablets poised to enter the market in the coming months. First, it appears to be just a handful of credible entrants, not exactly an avalanche. Second, almost all of them use seven-inch screens as compared to iPad's near 10-inch screen. Let's start there. One naturally thinks that a seven-inch screen would offer 70% of the benefits of a 10-inch screen. Unfortunately, this is far from the truth. The screen measurements are diagonal, so that a seven-inch screen is only 45% as large as iPad's 10-inch screen. You heard me right; just 45% as large. If you take an iPad and hold it upright in portrait view and draw an imaginary horizontal line halfway down the screen, the screens on the seven-inch tablets are a bit smaller than the bottom half of the iPad display. This size isn't sufficient to create great tablet apps in our opinion.Well, one could increase the resolution of the display to make up for some of the difference. It is meaningless, unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of the present size. Apple's done extensive user-testing on touch interfaces over many years, and we really understand this stuff. There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touch screen before users cannot reliably tap, flick or pinch them. This is one of the key reasons we think the 10-inch screen size is the minimum size required to create great tablet apps. Third, every tablet user is also a smartphone user. No tablet can compete with the mobility of a smartphone, its ease of fitting into your pocket or purse, its unobtrusiveness when used in a crowd. Given that all tablet users will already have a smartphone in their pockets, giving up precious display area to fit a tablet in our pockets is clearly the wrong tradeoff. The seven-inch tablets are tweeners, too big to compete with a smartphone and too small to compete with an iPad." SOURCE: http://m.seekingalpha.com/article/230710 Rgds, Tracy On Oct 23, 2012 1:21 PM, "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" wrote: > So considering the remarkable inverse accuracy of these statements they > should have announced "Digital divide will be around for ever, we guarantee > at least 5 years" - and then in 4 years we'd be clean? > > -C > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:51 PM, David Conrad wrote: > >> On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:12 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar >> wrote: >> > That was 5 computers - >> http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/feb/21/computing.supercomputers >> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson#Famous_misquote >> >> However, that article you referenced suggests 5 is 4 too many. >> >> > It's like Gates saying "640K Ram should be enough for everyone" >> >> http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/1997/01/1484 (note: potentially >> offensive language unrelated to the Gates quote towards the end of that >> article) >> >> Bill Gates did however say (in 1989) that Microsoft would never make a >> 32-bit operating system and that spam would be "a thing of the past in two >> years time" in 2004. >> >> > But yes why do they make such silly statements? And they're the ones in >> the forefront of computing (facepalm) >> >> Making predictions about the future is known to be a bit challenging, >> e.g., >> http://listverse.com/2007/10/28/top-30-failed-technology-predictions/ >> >> Regards, >> -drc >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 13:47:58 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 23:17:58 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <1135972384.76452.1351010172856.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e09> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <1135972384.76452.1351010172856.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e09> Message-ID: Thanks Jean-Louis! Just to be clear I'm not trying to dissuade here - it's an admirable and very positive thing happening; just that (I keep saying IMHO because that's what it is) it will not be a unilateral decision from the governments - but it *will* be a unilateral decision from the *end users *. Parminder I believe this addresses your question in a way as well. Plus even if we're able to provide a 24/7/365 setup - how many african nations are likely to create DCs/outbound ISPs? And how many are likely to be able to *sell* Africa-hosted clouds - *and make up their initial investment in full*? In my view, making a specific comparison, it will be at least 2-3 years before India can offer datacenter services that are considered on par (in terms of cost/roi/performance ratio) with today's US/UK/AU/Europe datacenter services, but that still does not mean that customers will buy it. What can be done to help reduce the gap today would be a matter of much conjecture - JVs and FDIs may help, franchising established foreign brands may help to get the market growing faster in India (eg. Softlayer India datacenter could have customers from developed countries that recognize the Softlayer 'brand'). But as I said this is all guesswork. Plus I'm only talking DCs/ISPs - I feel the same or a similar concept would apply for telecomms, automobiles/aircraft tech, weapons tech, and some other similar fields where the *perceived value* can be higher than the * true* *value*. Just my 2c. If it's value add do +1 :) -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: > Maybe Chaitanya that you're right about digital divide widening due to > "high speed clouds". In my opinion this isn't the only threat. > > > > Cloud networking requires a stable and 100% working network, i.e. > datacenters inlusive. All network components (equipment, centers, O&M > functionalities ...) need a stable and 24/7/365 electricity supply for > their feeding. In most countries of Africa electricity supply is > problematic, even in large cities. Therefore once you rely on distant SW > and Data for working with your terminal (i.e. in the cloud), the risks of a > "dark network" is sufficiently important for dissuading you from being > cloud enthousiastic ! Not to speak about public services and business > communications ! > > > > Best > > > > Jean-Louis Fullsack > > > > > > > > > > > > Message du 22/10/12 17:36 > > De : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" > > Copie à : "parminder" > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > Internet Economy > > > > > Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in > the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing > investment" will go: to the most developed countries. > > Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network > speeds and stable datacenters. > > How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? > > -C > > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > wrote: > > >> >> > >> >> > Isn't this a joke : >> >> > >> >> > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the >> following activities: >> >> > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework >> to support cloud computing. >> >> > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and >> reducing the digital divide. >> >> > >> > >> > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in >> African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries >> of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking >> in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't >> laugh at all ! >> >> > >> >> > Best >> >> > >> >> > Jean-Louis Fullsack >> >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 >> > > De : "parminder" >> > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> > > Copie à : >> > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on >> the Internet Economy >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: >> > > >> >> The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level >> meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet >> Economy in Washington, D.C. >> > > >> > > >> http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy >> > > >> >> >> > > From the agreement text: >> > > >> > > >> >> Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the >> “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication >> Technology Services. >> > > >> >> >> > > SNIP >> > > >> > > >> >> ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the >> following activities: >> >> > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework >> to support cloud computing. >> >> > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and >> reducing the digital divide. >> >> > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud >> computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. >> >> >> > > (quotes end) >> > > >> > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for >> the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. >> Industry reps too want them to develop '*international *framework to >> support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing >> countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... >> > > >> > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these >> global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these >> developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry >> (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same >> kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG >> civil society. >> > > >> > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team >> of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up >> the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. >> They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by >> the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil >> society. >> > > >> > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to >> the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy >> principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global >> Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up >> with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. >> > > >> > > parminder >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> >> > > Fahd >> > > >> >> >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> > >> >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ >> > 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 >> > >> > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From rudi.vansnick at isoc.be Tue Oct 23 14:08:36 2012 From: rudi.vansnick at isoc.be (Rudi Vansnick) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 20:08:36 +0200 Subject: [governance] UNODC In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4F1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4E9@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD4F1@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <77062D43-8B09-448B-9D41-1FA0EE4945C1@isoc.be> Thank you very much for this very informative piece of information. Rudi Vansnick Op 23-okt-2012, om 15:29 heeft Kleinwächter, Wolfgang het volgende geschreven: > http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf > > fyi > > w > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 14:09:07 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 23:39:07 +0530 Subject: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM In-Reply-To: References: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> Message-ID: It's a policy induced blindness. Very many MNCs maintain a regional website and dump the users on there based on what the GeoIP tells them. It's not nice. Google for example offers a workaround - I do hope Amazon does to - if there's some sort of location services turning that off could help. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Deirdre Williams < williams.deirdre at gmail.com> wrote: > I am still very confused by Amazon's attitude towards the IP address I am > using at any point in time. > Last year I was given a Kindle which was probably purchased locally (in > Saint Lucia, West Indies) or in the United States. Initially I made > purchases for it from my existing Amazon.uk account, but then was > re-directed to Amazon.com. Amazon.com lists different books, and anyway > they don't like my credit card (issued in Barbados) so I declined to go. > That Kindle was stolen, but obligingly blocked for further use through my > Amazon UK account. > In April I was in England where I was given a new Kindle, this time bought > in the UK > Using the Internet in the house where I was staying in London I discovered > with joy that I could retrieve all of the content from the stolen Kindle - > through my Amazon UK account. I bought several books as well as some other > things - through my Amazon UK account and was, as they say, happy as Larry > - until I got home to Saint Lucia and found myself redirected to Amazon.com > for things to do with my Kindle. > The single thing that varies is the IP address I am working from, and I > ask again - is that IP address any business of Amazon? Have I somehow > become my IP address? Is it of more importance than everything else - > including the billing address for my credit card? Where does my personal > privacy stand in this context? > I have asked the question before - also from Amazon - but I'm still not > convinced by the answers. > Can anyone un-confuse me please? > Deirdre. > > > On 23 October 2012 08:11, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > >> >> Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion >> About Ebooks, DRM >> >> Posted: 10/22/2012 4:36 pm EDT Updated: 10/22/2012 4:41 pm >> >> Linn's story, which appeared on Bekkelund's blog on Monday, has already >> triggered a heated discussionabout ebooks and digital rights management (DRM), with some calling this >> Amazon incident an example of DRM at its worst. >> >> "[The incident] highlights the power [DRM] offers blue-chip companies. >> DRM is used by hardware manufacturers and publishers to limit the use of >> digital content once it has been purchased by consumers; in Amazon's case, >> it means the company can prevent you from reading content you have bought >> at the Kindle store on a rival device," the Guardian writes. >> >> This is not the first time that Amazon has remotely erased Kindle >> content. >> >> As Andy Boxall of Digital Trendsnotes, the company deleted >> copies of "Animal Farm" and "1984"in 2009. It also occured in 2010, "when >> more dubious titles were removed too." >> >> "Amazon should not be able to erase content that has already been >> downloaded. >> If the company wants to close your account, fine; refuse future downloads. >> But unless it has proof that the books on that Kindle had been fraudulently >> downloaded, we don’t see how the company can justify erasing content that >> had been paid for by a customer," the Consumerist notes, adding that Amazon >> had yet to respond to a request for comment. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 14:12:01 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 14:12:01 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM In-Reply-To: References: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20121023093701.09aac080@resistor.net> Message-ID: I think I'm not explaining very well. The fact of the matter is that Amazon does not do business with my Kindle which has no access to funds, it does business with me. And I do not like being stalked by a multi-national - or by anyone else for that matter :-) On 23 October 2012 14:02, Deirdre Williams wrote: > I do understand that. What I don't understand is how that comes to be > Amazon's business? and quite why, apparently in the absence of any stated > policy, although I could have missed something there I admit, Amazon should > change its response to me as a business partner - I'm buying they are > selling - depending on the IP address which I would still contend is none > of their business. > Thank you for trying to help :-) > I suppose this is because I live in a part of the world where one is so > often constrained by the geography anyway - oh you're from there well you > can't do that - although slowly that is improving. > Deirdre > > > On 23 October 2012 12:51, SM wrote: > >> Hi Deirdre, >> >> At 08:51 23-10-2012, Deirdre Williams wrote: >> >>> The single thing that varies is the IP address I am working from, and I >>> ask again - is that IP address any business of Amazon? Have I somehow >>> become my IP address? Is it of >>> >> >> The service uses the IP address to determine the geographical location of >> the device. >> >> Regards, >> -sm >> > > > > -- > “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William > Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 > -- “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: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Tue Oct 23 14:47:28 2012 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:47:28 +0000 Subject: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM In-Reply-To: References: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> , Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B164DBF@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Hi Deirdre, Since I was discussing this in my Information Policy class yesterday, I will try to help. First, free yourself from the notion that you ever 'bought' any e-content at any Amazon site. And of course you never owned anything on any Kindle. Second, read the fine print. In the very very very fine print, you will realize that what you paid for was the right to use X on Y device with Z conditions. If you are outside the bounds of what you paid for the right to use - in other words, you have a rental and not a sales agreement - then unfortunately, in real life, the customer is not always right. So sounds all perfectly legal, even if perfectly annoying. And not wise practice for firms relying on repeat customers, given their content rental business model. Lee ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 2:09 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Deirdre Williams Cc: Riaz K Tayob Subject: Re: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM It's a policy induced blindness. Very many MNCs maintain a regional website and dump the users on there based on what the GeoIP tells them. It's not nice. Google for example offers a workaround - I do hope Amazon does to - if there's some sort of location services turning that off could help. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Deirdre Williams > wrote: I am still very confused by Amazon's attitude towards the IP address I am using at any point in time. Last year I was given a Kindle which was probably purchased locally (in Saint Lucia, West Indies) or in the United States. Initially I made purchases for it from my existing Amazon.uk account, but then was re-directed to Amazon.com. Amazon.com lists different books, and anyway they don't like my credit card (issued in Barbados) so I declined to go. That Kindle was stolen, but obligingly blocked for further use through my Amazon UK account. In April I was in England where I was given a new Kindle, this time bought in the UK Using the Internet in the house where I was staying in London I discovered with joy that I could retrieve all of the content from the stolen Kindle - through my Amazon UK account. I bought several books as well as some other things - through my Amazon UK account and was, as they say, happy as Larry - until I got home to Saint Lucia and found myself redirected to Amazon.com for things to do with my Kindle. The single thing that varies is the IP address I am working from, and I ask again - is that IP address any business of Amazon? Have I somehow become my IP address? Is it of more importance than everything else - including the billing address for my credit card? Where does my personal privacy stand in this context? I have asked the question before - also from Amazon - but I'm still not convinced by the answers. Can anyone un-confuse me please? Deirdre. On 23 October 2012 08:11, Riaz K Tayob > wrote: Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM Posted: 10/22/2012 4:36 pm EDT Updated: 10/22/2012 4:41 pm Linn's story, which appeared on Bekkelund's blog on Monday, has already triggered a heated discussion about ebooks and digital rights management (DRM), with some calling this Amazon incident an example of DRM at its worst. "[The incident] highlights the power [DRM] offers blue-chip companies. DRM is used by hardware manufacturers and publishers to limit the use of digital content once it has been purchased by consumers; in Amazon's case, it means the company can prevent you from reading content you have bought at the Kindle store on a rival device," the Guardian writes. This is not the first time that Amazon has remotely erased Kindle content. As Andy Boxall of Digital Trends notes, the company deleted copies of "Animal Farm" and "1984" in 2009. It also occured in 2010, "when more dubious titles were removed too." "Amazon should not be able to erase content that has already been downloaded. If the company wants to close your account, fine; refuse future downloads. But unless it has proof that the books on that Kindle had been fraudulently downloaded, we don’t see how the company can justify erasing content that had been paid for by a customer," the Consumerist notes, adding that Amazon had yet to respond to a request for comment. ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- “The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From vanda at uol.com.br Tue Oct 23 17:53:45 2012 From: vanda at uol.com.br (Vanda UOL) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 19:53:45 -0200 Subject: RES: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu>,<20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <8CF6E38BA1CF2C1-2348-75191@webmail-d167.sysops.aol.com > <506B5BA7.2030005@c avebear.com> Message-ID: <024d01cdb168$e354e800$a9feb800$@uol.com.br> Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good news in this side. Best, -----Mensagem original----- De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 > previous years of political philosophy and history. More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. We have forgotten history. Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. --karl-- -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Tue Oct 23 18:22:40 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:22:40 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>, <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local>,<50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF80EF@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Parminder, as Wolfgang Pauli reputedly said, "it isn't even wrong". I wont let this discussion distract you from preparing comments to the article McTim and Suresh have pointed to. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de parminder [parminder at itforchange.net] Enviado el: martes, 23 de octubre de 2012 03:07 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Alejandro/ Chaitanya, On Tuesday 23 October 2012 10:27 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: Chaitanya, thanks! so, not much of an Internet Governance aspect to this issue left. In fact, the primary internet 'Governance' question posed in my initial posting remains and has not been addressed at all, with the discussion swerving towards operational issues. I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. And since Alejandro mentions 'ugly imperialists' , I will like to say that it is in unilaterally imposing governance frameworks developed by rich countries over the whole world that 'ugly imperialism' comes in. You do all the governance work, and if developing countries want to do it, call them as despots out to control the Internet, and for good measure, co-opt a willing civil society into the game. parminder On to the next one. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 21:08 Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Hi Alex, I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or anything else) here - its just that even when these facilities are provided and available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par with Softlayer in most ways - except most importantly it's location. End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and without the revenue stream even the best won't be able to be there very long. -C On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > wrote: Chaitanya, let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 processors.) The key to the design was that the communication between the computers would never be more than an order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so we would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched computing power for big science problems like computerized fluid dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several hundred engineers we would have. Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before blaming it all on them? Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters" while "they" can? Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 10:35 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Jean-Louis FULLSACK CC: parminder Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters. How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? -C On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK > wrote: Isn't this a joke : ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! Best Jean-Louis Fullsack > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 > De : "parminder" > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Copie à : > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: > The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy > > From the agreement text: > > Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. > > SNIP > > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. > (quotes end) > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. > > parminder > > > > > > > > Fahd > > ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 18:24:10 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:24:10 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <024d01cdb168$e354e800$a9feb800$@uol.com.br> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$a9feb800$@uol.com.br> Message-ID: When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at hand. Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. Paul Lehto, J.D. > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote: > Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where > nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing > loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least > keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the > way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good > news in this side. > Best, > -----Mensagem original----- > De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach > Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 > Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles > > On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > > > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 > > previous years of political philosophy and history. > > More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. > > The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* > eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since > 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since > the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. > > The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are > not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors > or bodies of internet governance. > > Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over > matters affecting the internet and its users. > > When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose > of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in > conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet > use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that > he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. > > He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states > bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments > into these new bodies of governance. > > We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era > of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that > recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that > aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of > today. > > We have forgotten history. > > Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and > these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly > separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, > each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet > governance issue. > > That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies > of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance > among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played > by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that > happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an > implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash > to to survive and assert its role over domain names. > > --karl-- > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 20:12:19 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 02:12:19 +0200 Subject: [governance] FW: [Dewayne-Net] EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA In-Reply-To: <0CD37324-7B9E-4D37-9087-FFB0F9C046F4@warpspeed.com> References: <0CD37324-7B9E-4D37-9087-FFB0F9C046F4@warpspeed.com> Message-ID: <017601cdb17c$7f083dc0$7d18b940$@gmail.com> -----Original Message----- From: dewayne-net at warpspeed.com [mailto:dewayne-net at warpspeed.com] On Behalf Of Dewayne Hendricks Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:14 PM To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net Subject: [Dewayne-Net] EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA from the sad dept By Mike Masnick Oct 23, 2012 We already talked about how US officials have been working against a treaty to allow more access to copyrighted works for the disabled, but the latest report from Jamie Love highlights an even more nefarious part of the strategy. To hold the agreement hostage in order to backdoor in certain elements of ACTA/SOPA. This is mainly being led by the EU, but with support from the US. And the main part is putting lots of red tape around any exceptions -- and tying it to more standardized enforcement, which is what ACTA was really all about: The European Union primarily, but with some backing from the US government, is holding blind people's access hostage in and effort to introduce new global enforcement norms for copyright. If you look at most copyright exceptions in most countries, the system works as follows. If the exception applies, an activity is not considered infringement. If you do something that is not protected by the exception, you are infringing, and all sorts of bad things can happen, depending upon your national laws for infringement, which include both criminal and civil sanctions. That is how the US exceptions work for blind persons, and that's how nearly all national exceptions work for blind persons. But here at WIPO, the EU wants page after page of detailed regulation of anyone who uses an exception. The expanding verbiage of the agreement is almost entirely about introducing ACTA and SOPA like enforcement provisions into this agreement. We've already seen the EU try to backdoor ACTA provisions in elsewhere, so it should come as little surprise that it would also seek to abuse a treaty to help the disabled to get to the same point as well. Shameful, but not surprising. [snip] Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 20:12:19 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 02:12:19 +0200 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$ a9feb800$@uol.com.br> Message-ID: <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> +1 M From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL Cc: Karl Auerbach Subject: Re: [governance] Principles When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at hand. Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. Paul Lehto, J.D. > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote: Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good news in this side. Best, -----Mensagem original----- De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 > previous years of political philosophy and history. More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. We have forgotten history. Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. --karl-- ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 20:15:41 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 05:45:41 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <1135972384.76452.1351010172856.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e09> Message-ID: Softlayer has a datacenter in Singapore that it uses to service Asian clients. Singapore being pretty much well connected and having great infrastructure, I guess it is far easier that way. One other difference between soft layer and ctrls that you mentioned is that soft layer has a comparatively smaller percentage of its ip addresses in various block lists, while ctrls hosts rather a lot of email marketers for an ISP their size.. Indian email marketers not, currently, being any good at concepts like optin and customer privacy, that becomes tough for ctrls to put it mildly --srs (iPad) On 23-Oct-2012, at 23:17, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > Thanks Jean-Louis! Just to be clear I'm not trying to dissuade here - it's an admirable and very positive thing happening; just that (I keep saying IMHO because that's what it is) it will not be a unilateral decision from the governments - but it will be a unilateral decision from the end users. Parminder I believe this addresses your question in a way as well. > > Plus even if we're able to provide a 24/7/365 setup - how many african nations are likely to create DCs/outbound ISPs? And how many are likely to be able to sell Africa-hosted clouds - and make up their initial investment in full? > > In my view, making a specific comparison, it will be at least 2-3 years before India can offer datacenter services that are considered on par (in terms of cost/roi/performance ratio) with today's US/UK/AU/Europe datacenter services, but that still does not mean that customers will buy it. > > What can be done to help reduce the gap today would be a matter of much conjecture - JVs and FDIs may help, franchising established foreign brands may help to get the market growing faster in India (eg. Softlayer India datacenter could have customers from developed countries that recognize the Softlayer 'brand'). But as I said this is all guesswork. > > Plus I'm only talking DCs/ISPs - I feel the same or a similar concept would apply for telecomms, automobiles/aircraft tech, weapons tech, and some other similar fields where the perceived value can be higher than the true value. > > Just my 2c. If it's value add do +1 :) > > -C > > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: >> Maybe Chaitanya that you're right about digital divide widening due to "high speed clouds". In my opinion this isn't the only threat. >> >> >> >> Cloud networking requires a stable and 100% working network, i.e. datacenters inlusive. All network components (equipment, centers, O&M functionalities ...) need a stable and 24/7/365 electricity supply for their feeding. In most countries of Africa electricity supply is problematic, even in large cities. Therefore once you rely on distant SW and Data for working with your terminal (i.e. in the cloud), the risks of a "dark network" is sufficiently important for dissuading you from being cloud enthousiastic ! Not to speak about public services and business communications ! >> >> >> >> Best >> >> >> >> Jean-Louis Fullsack >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Message du 22/10/12 17:36 >> > De : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" >> > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" >> > Copie à : "parminder" >> > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy >> > >> > >> Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing investment" will go: to the most developed countries. >> >> Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters. >> >> How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? >> >> -C >> > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK wrote: >> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Isn't this a joke : >>> >>> > >>> >>> > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: >>> >>> > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. >>> >>> > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't laugh at all ! >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Best >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Jean-Louis Fullsack >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 >>> > > De : "parminder" >>> > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> > > Copie à : >>> > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy >>> >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: >>> > > >>> The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy in Washington, D.C. >>> > > >>> > > http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy >>> > > >>> >>> > > From the agreement text: >>> > > >>> > > >>> Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication Technology Services. >>> > > >>> >>> > > SNIP >>> > > >>> > > >>> ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the following activities: >>> > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international framework to support cloud computing. >>> >>> > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and reducing the digital divide. >>> >>> > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. >>> >>> >>> > > (quotes end) >>> > > >>> > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. Industry reps too want them to develop 'international framework to support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... >>> > > >>> > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called global IG civil society. >>> > > >>> > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil society. >>> > > >>> > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. >>> > > >>> > > parminder >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> >>> > > Fahd >>> > > >>> >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >>> >>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >> >> > >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 20:23:40 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 05:53:40 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF80EF@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF80EF@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: <28291CD6-647D-4510-B707-DEDFEA0B676C@hserus.net> Certainly, if any two entities commit resources, experts etc and come up with a useful set of best practices, which is what a framework is, when you boil it down, it is out there, and for any country to adopt, or not, as it suits them. Knowing the USA and Japan, industry and civil society is likely much deeper engaged, and thus contributing a much hier level of expertise, than in other countries where you would only get a token window dressing level of presence from non government stakeholders. So I would count that as a second plus. When we talk of multistakeholderism, we need to beware of demanding a stake "just because". Unless there is something significant .. Not necessarily money ... to contribute. --srs (iPad) On 24-Oct-2012, at 3:52, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" wrote: > Parminder, > > as Wolfgang Pauli reputedly said, "it isn't even wrong". > > I wont let this discussion distract you from preparing comments to the article McTim and Suresh have pointed to. > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de parminder [parminder at itforchange.net] > Enviado el: martes, 23 de octubre de 2012 03:07 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy > > > Alejandro/ Chaitanya, > > On Tuesday 23 October 2012 10:27 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: >> Chaitanya, >> >> thanks! so, not much of an Internet Governance aspect to this issue left. > > In fact, the primary internet 'Governance' question posed in my initial posting remains and has not been addressed at all, with the discussion swerving towards operational issues. > > I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. > > And since Alejandro mentions 'ugly imperialists' , I will like to say that it is in unilaterally imposing governance frameworks developed by rich countries over the whole world that 'ugly imperialism' comes in. You do all the governance work, and if developing countries want to do it, call them as despots out to control the Internet, and for good measure, co-opt a willing civil society into the game. > > > parminder > > >> On to the next one. >> >> Yours, >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> >> >> ! !! !!! !!!! >> NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO >> >> >> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >> >> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO >> >> SMS +525541444475 >> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >> >> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty >> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 >> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty >> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org >> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >> >> Desde: Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] >> Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 21:08 >> Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch >> CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy >> >> Hi Alex, >> >> I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or anything else) here - its just that even when these facilities are provided and available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par with Softlayer in most ways - except most importantly it's location. >> >> End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and without the revenue stream even the best won't be able to be there very long. >> >> -C >> >> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: >>> Chaitanya, >>> >>> let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. >>> >>> Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 processors.) The key to the design was that the communication between the computers would never be more than an order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so we would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched computing power for big science problems like computerized fluid dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. >>> >>> This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. >>> >>> Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several hundred engineers we would have. >>> >>> Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before blaming it all on them? >>> >>> Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters" while "they" can? >>> >>> Alejandro Pisanty >>> >>> >>> ! !! !!! !!!! > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 20:34:44 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:04:44 +0530 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$ a9feb800$@uol.com.br> <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> Even in a democracy, people who exercise their franchise, go out and vote have a bigger say in things than people who sit in a bar and grumble about how Obama is taking away their jobs and turning america into a communist hellhole. People who actually participate in community level all the way to national politics have an even bigger say than those who do vote. Would you say that is an oligarchic process rather than a democratic one? Just like in the political process, the size of your stake depends on the level of effort and resources you are willing to commit. And unlike the political process you don't need a war chest of millions to participate in a multistakeholder environment. You do need to commit time and people, and build capacity within your organization, if you expect to have any sort of a meaningful stake. Rather than, say, demand a stake just because "every citizen of the world is a stakeholder in the Internet governance process" --srs (iPad) On 24-Oct-2012, at 5:42, "michael gurstein" wrote: > +1 > > M > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL > Cc: Karl Auerbach > Subject: Re: [governance] Principles > > > When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. > > Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at hand. > > Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > > > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism > > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote: > Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good news in this side. > Best, > -----Mensagem original----- > De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach > Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 > Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles > > On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > > > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 > > previous years of political philosophy and history. > > More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. > > The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since > 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. > > The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. > > Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. > > When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. > > He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. > > We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. > > We have forgotten history. > > Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. > > That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. > > --karl-- > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 20:45:53 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 20:45:53 -0400 Subject: [governance] FW: [Dewayne-Net] EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA In-Reply-To: <017601cdb17c$7f083dc0$7d18b940$@gmail.com> References: <0CD37324-7B9E-4D37-9087-FFB0F9C046F4@warpspeed.com> <017601cdb17c$7f083dc0$7d18b940$@gmail.com> Message-ID: In the USA, it's a known political strategy to (metaphorically) strap the disabled to the front of tanks and then roll through the Tiananmen Square of democracy, defying civil society to shoot. Being civil, civil society most often refuses to shoot at such tanks.... This is kind of like how the EU is seeking to backdoor ACTA provisions via provisions for the disabled, as mentioned in the article below. As much as most or all of us wish to be helpful to the situation of the disabled, at the same time we have to keep our eyes open for the side effects of provisions for the disabled, and especially the threat of a political strategy of intentionally abusing the strong political support for the disabled in order to sneak in unpopular things. Paul Lehto, J.D. PS Specifically, in the USA, the "Help America Vote Act" (HAVA) was passed with quite a few provisions claimed for the disabled crafted onto to what was more fundamentally a federal takeover of all elections, an elimination of transparency in vote counting by eliminating paper ballots/trails in most instances, and was also a pork barrel bonanza for certain vendors who could more easily meet the specifications recommended or demanded by HAVA. On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:12 PM, michael gurstein wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dewayne-net at warpspeed.com [mailto:dewayne-net at warpspeed.com] On > Behalf > Of Dewayne Hendricks > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 10:14 PM > To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net > Subject: [Dewayne-Net] EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf > Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA > > EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To > Get A New ACTA/SOPA from the sad dept By Mike Masnick Oct 23, 2012 > < > http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121020/23344420778/eu-us-negotiators-loo > king-to-hold-blind-deaf-access-rights-hostage-to-get-new-actasopa.shtml> > > We already talked about how US officials have been working against a treaty > to allow more access to copyrighted works for the disabled, but the latest > report from Jamie Love highlights an even more nefarious part of the > strategy. To hold the agreement hostage in order to backdoor in certain > elements of ACTA/SOPA. This is mainly being led by the EU, but with support > from the US. And the main part is putting lots of red tape around any > exceptions -- and tying it to more standardized enforcement, which is what > ACTA was really all about: > > The European Union primarily, but with some backing from the US government, > is holding blind people's access hostage in and effort to introduce new > global enforcement norms for copyright. If you look at most copyright > exceptions in most countries, the system works as follows. If the exception > applies, an activity is not considered infringement. If you do something > that is not protected by the exception, you are infringing, and all sorts > of > bad things can happen, depending upon your national laws for infringement, > which include both criminal and civil sanctions. That is how the US > exceptions work for blind persons, and that's how nearly all national > exceptions work for blind persons. But here at WIPO, the EU wants page > after > page of detailed regulation of anyone who uses an exception. The expanding > verbiage of the agreement is almost entirely about introducing ACTA and > SOPA > like enforcement provisions into this agreement. > > We've already seen the EU try to backdoor ACTA provisions in elsewhere, so > it should come as little surprise that it would also seek to abuse a treaty > to help the disabled to get to the same point as well. Shameful, but not > surprising. > > [snip] > > Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 21:00:02 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:00:02 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$a9feb800$@uol.com.br> <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Even in a democracy, people who exercise their franchise, go out and vote > have a bigger say in things than people who sit in a bar and grumble about > how Obama is taking away their jobs and turning america into a communist > hellhole. > > People who actually participate in community level all the way to national > politics have an even bigger say than those who do vote. > > Would you say that is an oligarchic process rather than a democratic one? > > Not at all, because as you say yourself, everyone has the chance to "participate in the community level all the way to national politics." It's still a democracy and not an oligarchy if people have the right to vote, but choose not to. Similarly, the same is true for this participation you refer to. Just like in the political process, the size of your stake depends on the > level of effort and resources you are willing to commit. And unlike the > political process you don't need a war chest of millions to participate in > a multistakeholder environment. > This translates to: The size of your stake (VOTE) depends on the level effort and resources you are willing to commit. I.e. it depends on your wealth, which wealth frees up both the time and the resources to participate. Do I need to restate that basing one's vote and therefore one's ULTIMATE say being magnified or diminished by one's wealth or business interest in the area is offensive to one person one vote democracy? > You do need to commit time and people, and build capacity within your > organization, if you expect to have any sort of a meaningful stake. > Rather than, say, demand a stake just because "every citizen of the world > is a stakeholder in the Internet governance process. > Anybody can amass time and people to do the *lobbying *effort of whatever size, from zero to millions, that they wish. And that's what you are describing here, regardless of whether we are talking about citizen lobbyists from the grassroots or the more common and more powerful corporate lobbyists. *Multistakeholder process puts the lobbyists completely in charge! * And MS disfranchises all voters except the lobbyists, mostly corporate and some token civil society lobbyists. The fact that the various stakeholders electing themselves to power in MS systems have millions of dollars or hours invested, together with some expertise, is really quite irrelevant when it comes to democracy. Paul Lehto, J.D. > On 24-Oct-2012, at 5:42, "michael gurstein" wrote: > > +1**** > > ** ** > > M**** > > ** ** > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ > mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] > *On Behalf Of *Paul Lehto > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL > *Cc:* Karl Auerbach > *Subject:* Re: [governance] Principles**** > > ** ** > > > When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things > within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like > Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta > that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may > seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It > just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, > perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. > > Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not > WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not > recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at > hand. > > Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use > the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. > Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums > out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > **** > > >** ** > > > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism > > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. > > **** > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote:**** > > Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where > nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing > loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least > keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the > way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good > news in this side. > Best, > -----Mensagem original----- > De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach > Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 > Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles**** > > > On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: > > > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 > > previous years of political philosophy and history. > > More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. > > The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* > eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since > 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since > the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. > > The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are > not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors > or bodies of internet governance. > > Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over > matters affecting the internet and its users. > > When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose > of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in > conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet > use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that > he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. > > He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states > bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments > into these new bodies of governance. > > We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era > of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that > recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that > aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of > today. > > We have forgotten history. > > Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and > these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly > separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, > each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet > governance issue. > > That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies > of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance > among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played > by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that > happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an > implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash > to to survive and assert its role over domain names. > > --karl-- > > > > > **** > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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**** > > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > **** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 21:05:14 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:35:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$ a9feb800$@uol.com.br> <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> Message-ID: <1060CD28-ECBF-4603-8EC0-D6EB0AD153E9@hserus.net> even in the multistakeholder process, the size of your stake depends a lot on 1. how many conferences in exotic locations you are willing to fly to 2. how many experts in tech, policy, law etc you can afford to hire 3. how much are you willing to commit out of what you have to a particular igov process rather than any of a multitude of other multistakeholder processes within and outside of igov so, again, what is the difference, in practice? --srs (iPad) On 24-Oct-2012, at 6:30, Paul Lehto wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Even in a democracy, people who exercise their franchise, go out and vote have a bigger say in things than people who sit in a bar and grumble about how Obama is taking away their jobs and turning america into a communist hellhole. >> >> People who actually participate in community level all the way to national politics have an even bigger say than those who do vote. >> >> Would you say that is an oligarchic process rather than a democratic one? > > Not at all, because as you say yourself, everyone has the chance to "participate in the community level all the way to national politics." It's still a democracy and not an oligarchy if people have the right to vote, but choose not to. Similarly, the same is true for this participation you refer to. > >> Just like in the political process, the size of your stake depends on the level of effort and resources you are willing to commit. And unlike the political process you don't need a war chest of millions to participate in a multistakeholder environment. > > This translates to: The size of your stake (VOTE) depends on the level effort and resources you are willing to commit. I.e. it depends on your wealth, which wealth frees up both the time and the resources to participate. Do I need to restate that basing one's vote and therefore one's ULTIMATE say being magnified or diminished by one's wealth or business interest in the area is offensive to one person one vote democracy? > >> >> You do need to commit time and people, and build capacity within your organization, if you expect to have any sort of a meaningful stake. Rather than, say, demand a stake just because "every citizen of the world is a stakeholder in the Internet governance process. > > Anybody can amass time and people to do the lobbying effort of whatever size, from zero to millions, that they wish. And that's what you are describing here, regardless of whether we are talking about citizen lobbyists from the grassroots or the more common and more powerful corporate lobbyists. > > Multistakeholder process puts the lobbyists completely in charge! > > And MS disfranchises all voters except the lobbyists, mostly corporate and some token civil society lobbyists. > > The fact that the various stakeholders electing themselves to power in MS systems have millions of dollars or hours invested, together with some expertise, is really quite irrelevant when it comes to democracy. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > >> >> On 24-Oct-2012, at 5:42, "michael gurstein" wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> >>> >>> M >>> >>> >>> >>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM >>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL >>> Cc: Karl Auerbach >>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. >>> >>> Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at hand. >>> >>> Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. >>> >>> Paul Lehto, J.D. >>> >>> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: >>> >>> > >>> >>> > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism >>> > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote: >>> >>> Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good news in this side. >>> Best, >>> -----Mensagem original----- >>> De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach >>> Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 >>> Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles >>> >>> >>> On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >>> >>> > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 >>> > previous years of political philosophy and history. >>> >>> More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. >>> >>> The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since >>> 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. >>> >>> The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. >>> >>> Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. >>> >>> When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. >>> >>> He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. >>> >>> We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. >>> >>> We have forgotten history. >>> >>> Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. >>> >>> That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. >>> >>> --karl-- >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >>> P.O. Box 1 >>> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >>> lehto.paul at gmail.com >>> 906-204-4965 (cell) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 21:09:09 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:39:09 +0530 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <1060CD28-ECBF-4603-8EC0-D6EB0AD153E9@hserus.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$ a9feb800$@uol.com.br> <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> <1060CD28-ECBF-4603-8EC0-D6EB0AD153E9@hserus.net> Message-ID: <119A7FF0-81CC-4811-A551-0175181B1A2C@hserus.net> I might add that in a multistakeholder environment you don't need to be *lobbyists* - while there are plenty of people with their own agendas, there ARE quite a lot of people who actually are there to contribute expertise rather than swing a narrow set of policy goals driven by ideology, profit or whatever other motive drives the typical lobbyist. --srs (iPad) On 24-Oct-2012, at 6:35, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > even in the multistakeholder process, the size of your stake depends a lot on > > 1. how many conferences in exotic locations you are willing to fly to > 2. how many experts in tech, policy, law etc you can afford to hire > 3. how much are you willing to commit out of what you have to a particular igov process rather than any of a multitude of other multistakeholder processes within and outside of igov > > so, again, what is the difference, in practice? > > --srs (iPad) > > On 24-Oct-2012, at 6:30, Paul Lehto wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >>> Even in a democracy, people who exercise their franchise, go out and vote have a bigger say in things than people who sit in a bar and grumble about how Obama is taking away their jobs and turning america into a communist hellhole. >>> >>> People who actually participate in community level all the way to national politics have an even bigger say than those who do vote. >>> >>> Would you say that is an oligarchic process rather than a democratic one? >> >> Not at all, because as you say yourself, everyone has the chance to "participate in the community level all the way to national politics." It's still a democracy and not an oligarchy if people have the right to vote, but choose not to. Similarly, the same is true for this participation you refer to. >> >>> Just like in the political process, the size of your stake depends on the level of effort and resources you are willing to commit. And unlike the political process you don't need a war chest of millions to participate in a multistakeholder environment. >> >> This translates to: The size of your stake (VOTE) depends on the level effort and resources you are willing to commit. I.e. it depends on your wealth, which wealth frees up both the time and the resources to participate. Do I need to restate that basing one's vote and therefore one's ULTIMATE say being magnified or diminished by one's wealth or business interest in the area is offensive to one person one vote democracy? >> >>> >>> You do need to commit time and people, and build capacity within your organization, if you expect to have any sort of a meaningful stake. Rather than, say, demand a stake just because "every citizen of the world is a stakeholder in the Internet governance process. >> >> Anybody can amass time and people to do the lobbying effort of whatever size, from zero to millions, that they wish. And that's what you are describing here, regardless of whether we are talking about citizen lobbyists from the grassroots or the more common and more powerful corporate lobbyists. >> >> Multistakeholder process puts the lobbyists completely in charge! >> >> And MS disfranchises all voters except the lobbyists, mostly corporate and some token civil society lobbyists. >> >> The fact that the various stakeholders electing themselves to power in MS systems have millions of dollars or hours invested, together with some expertise, is really quite irrelevant when it comes to democracy. >> >> Paul Lehto, J.D. >> >>> >>> On 24-Oct-2012, at 5:42, "michael gurstein" wrote: >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> M >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto >>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM >>>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL >>>> Cc: Karl Auerbach >>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. >>>> >>>> Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at hand. >>>> >>>> Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. >>>> >>>> Paul Lehto, J.D. >>>> >>>> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: >>>> >>>> > >>>> >>>> > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism >>>> > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote: >>>> >>>> Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good news in this side. >>>> Best, >>>> -----Mensagem original----- >>>> De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach >>>> Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 >>>> Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles >>>> >>>> >>>> On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >>>> >>>> > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 >>>> > previous years of political philosophy and history. >>>> >>>> More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. >>>> >>>> The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since >>>> 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. >>>> >>>> The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. >>>> >>>> Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. >>>> >>>> When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. >>>> >>>> He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. >>>> >>>> We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. >>>> >>>> We have forgotten history. >>>> >>>> Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. >>>> >>>> That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. >>>> >>>> --karl-- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >>>> P.O. Box 1 >>>> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >>>> lehto.paul at gmail.com >>>> 906-204-4965 (cell) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >> P.O. Box 1 >> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >> lehto.paul at gmail.com >> 906-204-4965 (cell) > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 21:22:55 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:22:55 -0400 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: <1060CD28-ECBF-4603-8EC0-D6EB0AD153E9@hserus.net> References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$a9feb800$@uol.com.br> <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> <1060CD28-ECBF-4603-8EC0-D6EB0AD153E9@hserus.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > even in the multistakeholder process, the size of your stake depends a lot > on > > 1. how many conferences in exotic locations you are willing to fly to > 2. how many experts in tech, policy, law etc you can afford to hire > 3. how much are you willing to commit out of what you have to a particular > igov process rather than any of a multitude of other multistakeholder > processes within and outside of igov > > so, again, what is the difference, in practice? > The difference is this: The wealthy have disproportionate lobbying power *in a democracy*, but when it comes down to voting, everyone has an equal vote, no matter how rich or how poor. Democracy passes the "So What?" test by giving the people the ability to kick the bums out if they thumb their nose at the people and say "so what!" to the complaints and concerns of the people. In contrast, in MS systems, the wealthy lobbyists' interests ARE the officials holding power, perhaps with a token citizen lobbyist or two from civil society. Nobody has a vote except these business and citizen lobbyists, only these political pros have a vote, the people can never kick these bums out no matter how corrupt or ineffectual they may be, and participation hinges basically entirely on wealth in the form of time and/or money invested, with the absolute minimum barrier to entry being hundreds of hours of time and worldwide travel capability for the token civil society representatives. MS systems can say "so what!" to the people with relative impunity. It matters not at all that some MS officials claim to be, OR ARE, simply providing neutral objective advice or expertise. Such folks strongly wish to add that input and it is still their personal stake in the process as they have freely defined it. Again, the issue as to whether there is democracy or not is not so much the qualities of the MS officials as lobbyists-now-brought-to-power (and so they don't "lobby" in quite the same way any more, being the holders of power). The issue is all the people that don't even have the MINIMUM of a vote, regardless of how badly they may want it. Because of that, the average person takes a huge step back. Under MS, there's nothing the people can really do if they don't like what the aristocrats and oligarchs decide, except to pray that they are philosopher kings. Under MS, the aristocratic lobbyists, whether corporate or citizen lobbyists, have effectively eliminated the targets of their lobbying - elected officials - and assumed power themselves to the exclusion of the voices of all other people. Paul Lehto, J.D. > > --srs (iPad) > > On 24-Oct-2012, at 6:30, Paul Lehto wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian > wrote: > >> Even in a democracy, people who exercise their franchise, go out and vote >> have a bigger say in things than people who sit in a bar and grumble about >> how Obama is taking away their jobs and turning america into a communist >> hellhole. >> >> People who actually participate in community level all the way to >> national politics have an even bigger say than those who do vote. >> >> Would you say that is an oligarchic process rather than a democratic one? >> >> > Not at all, because as you say yourself, everyone has the chance to > "participate in the community level all the way to national politics." > It's still a democracy and not an oligarchy if people have the right to > vote, but choose not to. Similarly, the same is true for this participation > you refer to. > > Just like in the political process, the size of your stake depends on the >> level of effort and resources you are willing to commit. And unlike the >> political process you don't need a war chest of millions to participate in >> a multistakeholder environment. >> > > This translates to: The size of your stake (VOTE) depends on the level > effort and resources you are willing to commit. I.e. it depends on your > wealth, which wealth frees up both the time and the resources to > participate. Do I need to restate that basing one's vote and therefore > one's ULTIMATE say being magnified or diminished by one's wealth or > business interest in the area is offensive to one person one vote democracy? > > >> You do need to commit time and people, and build capacity within your >> organization, if you expect to have any sort of a meaningful stake. >> Rather than, say, demand a stake just because "every citizen of the world >> is a stakeholder in the Internet governance process. >> > > Anybody can amass time and people to do the *lobbying *effort of whatever > size, from zero to millions, that they wish. And that's what you are > describing here, regardless of whether we are talking about citizen > lobbyists from the grassroots or the more common and more powerful > corporate lobbyists. > > *Multistakeholder process puts the lobbyists completely in charge! * > > And MS disfranchises all voters except the lobbyists, mostly corporate > and some token civil society lobbyists. > > The fact that the various stakeholders electing themselves to power in MS > systems have millions of dollars or hours invested, together with some > expertise, is really quite irrelevant when it comes to democracy. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > > >> On 24-Oct-2012, at 5:42, "michael gurstein" wrote: >> >> +1**** >> >> ** ** >> >> M**** >> >> ** ** >> >> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ >> mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] >> *On Behalf Of *Paul Lehto >> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM >> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL >> *Cc:* Karl Auerbach >> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Principles**** >> >> ** ** >> >> >> When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things >> within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like >> Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta >> that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may >> seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It >> just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, >> perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. >> >> Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured >> not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not >> recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at >> hand. >> >> Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use >> the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. >> Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums >> out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. >> >> Paul Lehto, J.D. >> >> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach >> wrote:**** >> >> >** ** >> >> > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism >> > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. >> >> **** >> >> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote:**** >> >> Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where >> nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing >> loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least >> keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the >> way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good >> news in this side. >> Best, >> -----Mensagem original----- >> De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: >> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach >> Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 >> Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >> Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles**** >> >> >> On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >> >> > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 >> > previous years of political philosophy and history. >> >> More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. >> >> The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* >> eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since >> 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since >> the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. >> >> The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states >> are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private >> actors or bodies of internet governance. >> >> Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over >> matters affecting the internet and its users. >> >> When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose >> of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in >> conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet >> use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that >> he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. >> >> He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states >> bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments >> into these new bodies of governance. >> >> We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era >> of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that >> recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that >> aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of >> today. >> >> We have forgotten history. >> >> Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and >> these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly >> separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, >> each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet >> governance issue. >> >> That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies >> of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance >> among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played >> by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that >> happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an >> implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash >> to to survive and assert its role over domain names. >> >> --karl-- >> >> >> >> >> **** >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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**** >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >> P.O. Box 1 >> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >> lehto.paul at gmail.com >> 906-204-4965 (cell) >> >> >> >> >> >> **** >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 21:30:34 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 07:00:34 +0530 Subject: [governance] Principles In-Reply-To: References: <97C82E9A-F686-49C9-9475-CB3733699919@gmail.com> <50656139.4070604@cis-india.org> <02350A3A-0235-4E7A-B1D0-5D6ED84AEE4C@safernet.org.br> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD223EFEA@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <506944F6.1090501@itforchange.net> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3C5@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <1025562875.8772.1349081476302.JavaMail.www@wwinf1f27> <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3CE@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> <04e201cd9fd4$93de6080$bb9b2180$@gmail.com> <5069A3AF.7060500@gmx.net> <005c01cd9fe2$30ca9320$925fb960$@gmail.com> <4867EA09-80AD-40ED-9487-56E0ED02C9F3@post.harvard.edu> <20121001222306.31a0349c@quill.bollow.ch> <6819FD91-3470-43FD-AA07-1A7D1268C8FA@post.harvard.edu> <506B5BA7.2030005@cavebear.com> <024d01cdb168$e354e800$ a9feb800$@uol.com.br> <017701cdb17c$81d651e0$8582f5a0$@gmail.com> <2DCC2B1A-131B-4E61-BB25-FE25975160FA@hserus.net> <1060CD28-ECBF-4603-8EC0-D6EB0AD153E9@hserus.net> Message-ID: I see your point, but unless it is a citizen government like the cantons of switzerland where every man and his dog gets to vote on whether the village square needs a new public toilet or not, what you suggest still doesn't ensure true participation when scaled to the levels we're both talking about (large country elections, international multistakeholder processes etc). Like, you have a bunch of people who passionately believe in, say, making the cat the national animal of the USA. Even if they do go out and vote to throw out the bums who insist that having the bald eagle as the national bird is quite enough, thank you, the size of their stake is naturally self limiting unless they go out there and canvass [which then ultimately boils down to the "how many", "how much" type questions below] --srs (iPad) On 24-Oct-2012, at 6:52, Paul Lehto wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 9:05 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> even in the multistakeholder process, the size of your stake depends a lot on >> >> 1. how many conferences in exotic locations you are willing to fly to >> 2. how many experts in tech, policy, law etc you can afford to hire >> 3. how much are you willing to commit out of what you have to a particular igov process rather than any of a multitude of other multistakeholder processes within and outside of igov >> >> so, again, what is the difference, in practice? > > The difference is this: The wealthy have disproportionate lobbying power in a democracy, but when it comes down to voting, everyone has an equal vote, no matter how rich or how poor. Democracy passes the "So What?" test by giving the people the ability to kick the bums out if they thumb their nose at the people and say "so what!" to the complaints and concerns of the people. > > In contrast, in MS systems, the wealthy lobbyists' interests ARE the officials holding power, perhaps with a token citizen lobbyist or two from civil society. Nobody has a vote except these business and citizen lobbyists, only these political pros have a vote, the people can never kick these bums out no matter how corrupt or ineffectual they may be, and participation hinges basically entirely on wealth in the form of time and/or money invested, with the absolute minimum barrier to entry being hundreds of hours of time and worldwide travel capability for the token civil society representatives. MS systems can say "so what!" to the people with relative impunity. > > It matters not at all that some MS officials claim to be, OR ARE, simply providing neutral objective advice or expertise. Such folks strongly wish to add that input and it is still their personal stake in the process as they have freely defined it. Again, the issue as to whether there is democracy or not is not so much the qualities of the MS officials as lobbyists-now-brought-to-power (and so they don't "lobby" in quite the same way any more, being the holders of power). The issue is all the people that don't even have the MINIMUM of a vote, regardless of how badly they may want it. Because of that, the average person takes a huge step back. > > Under MS, there's nothing the people can really do if they don't like what the aristocrats and oligarchs decide, except to pray that they are philosopher kings. Under MS, the aristocratic lobbyists, whether corporate or citizen lobbyists, have effectively eliminated the targets of their lobbying - elected officials - and assumed power themselves to the exclusion of the voices of all other people. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 24-Oct-2012, at 6:30, Paul Lehto wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >>>> Even in a democracy, people who exercise their franchise, go out and vote have a bigger say in things than people who sit in a bar and grumble about how Obama is taking away their jobs and turning america into a communist hellhole. >>>> >>>> People who actually participate in community level all the way to national politics have an even bigger say than those who do vote. >>>> >>>> Would you say that is an oligarchic process rather than a democratic one? >>> >>> Not at all, because as you say yourself, everyone has the chance to "participate in the community level all the way to national politics." It's still a democracy and not an oligarchy if people have the right to vote, but choose not to. Similarly, the same is true for this participation you refer to. >>> >>>> Just like in the political process, the size of your stake depends on the level of effort and resources you are willing to commit. And unlike the political process you don't need a war chest of millions to participate in a multistakeholder environment. >>> >>> This translates to: The size of your stake (VOTE) depends on the level effort and resources you are willing to commit. I.e. it depends on your wealth, which wealth frees up both the time and the resources to participate. Do I need to restate that basing one's vote and therefore one's ULTIMATE say being magnified or diminished by one's wealth or business interest in the area is offensive to one person one vote democracy? >>> >>>> >>>> You do need to commit time and people, and build capacity within your organization, if you expect to have any sort of a meaningful stake. Rather than, say, demand a stake just because "every citizen of the world is a stakeholder in the Internet governance process. >>> >>> Anybody can amass time and people to do the lobbying effort of whatever size, from zero to millions, that they wish. And that's what you are describing here, regardless of whether we are talking about citizen lobbyists from the grassroots or the more common and more powerful corporate lobbyists. >>> >>> Multistakeholder process puts the lobbyists completely in charge! >>> >>> And MS disfranchises all voters except the lobbyists, mostly corporate and some token civil society lobbyists. >>> >>> The fact that the various stakeholders electing themselves to power in MS systems have millions of dollars or hours invested, together with some expertise, is really quite irrelevant when it comes to democracy. >>> >>> Paul Lehto, J.D. >>> >>>> >>>> On 24-Oct-2012, at 5:42, "michael gurstein" wrote: >>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> M >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto >>>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 12:24 AM >>>>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Vanda UOL >>>>> Cc: Karl Auerbach >>>>> Subject: Re: [governance] Principles >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> When aristocrats or oligarchs get together, certain procedural things within the ruling junta can be quite "democratic", very much like Multi-stakeholderism can have internal procedures amongst the ruling junta that appear quite fair-minded. These internal procedures, though they may seem democratic, don't make aristocracy or oligarchy democratic at all. It just means these rulers act like equals and are civil to each other, perhaps even willing to listen once in a while to the masses. >>>>> >>>>> Whether something is democratic or aristocratic/oligarchic is measured not WITHIN the organization, but by reference to those whose voice is not recognized (via representatives) in the form of a vote in the matters at hand. >>>>> >>>>> Multistakeholderism is not democracy, and it is misleading at best to use the term "democratic" to describe procedures within Multistakeholderism. Until every voter has the right to exercise their vote to "kick the bums out" (their own representative) it's not democracy. >>>>> >>>>> Paul Lehto, J.D. >>>>> >>>>> > On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> > I rather take a rather different position, which is that stakeholderism >>>>> > is oligarchy and not democratic at all. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 5:53 PM, Vanda UOL wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Very interesting Karl, we need take care with the private monopoly where nothing that people can do to change things will be heard. Countries facing loss of power are, deeper and deeper trying to get something to at least keep their own status quo, no new in this side. What needs to be new is the way the governance in several aspects of Internet. I am not seeing good news in this side. >>>>> Best, >>>>> -----Mensagem original----- >>>>> De: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] Em nome de Karl Auerbach >>>>> Enviada em: terça-feira, 2 de outubro de 2012 18:25 >>>>> Para: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>>> Assunto: Re: [governance] Principles >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10/01/2012 03:10 PM, Koven Ronald wrote: >>>>> >>>>> > ... posited on the notion that the Internet has revoked the 2,500 >>>>> > previous years of political philosophy and history. >>>>> >>>>> More like about 370 years - since the Treaty of Westphalia. >>>>> >>>>> The truth is that that world of geograhic-bounded nation-states *is* eroding; the edges of nation-states are getting fuzzy, especially since >>>>> 1945 with the rise of nation-agile multinational corporations and since the mid 1990's with the rise of the internet and world wide web. >>>>> >>>>> The granules of power that are eroding from the edges of nation-states are not disappearing, they are flowing into the hands of either private actors or bodies of internet governance. >>>>> >>>>> Those granules represent plenary, often non-reviewable, authority over matters affecting the internet and its users. >>>>> >>>>> When I was on the Board of Directors of ICANN I had fun tweeking the nose of a US Senator when I informed him of the indisputable fact that I, in conjunction with about 10 other Directors, could pass a rule over internet use of trademarks and names that would supersede and trump anything that he, as a mere United States Senator, could enact. >>>>> >>>>> He got angry - much in the way we see the fear and anger of nation states bubbling over in attempts to re-assert and re-insert national governments into these new bodies of governance. >>>>> >>>>> We are building internet governance on models that are more from the era of flower-power and high-hopes rather than on the 18th century models that recognize the aggregation of unchecked power and try to constrain that aggregation, models that form the basis of many national constitutions of today. >>>>> >>>>> We have forgotten history. >>>>> >>>>> Several of us have proposed various models of internet governance - and these models have all emphasized small, extremely limited, and clearly separated bodies, with extremely limited, if any, discretionary powers, each wrapped around exactly one highly and clearly defined internet governance issue. >>>>> >>>>> That model of concise, tightly shrink-wrapped, and almost clerical bodies of governance would help eliminate the opportunity for a body to dance among the issues to leverage one issue against another to the tune played by whatever group of stakeholders has captured that body. We saw that happen with ICANN when it staved off insolvency some years ago by making an implicit pact with the address registries so that ICANN could have the cash to to survive and assert its role over domain names. >>>>> >>>>> --karl-- >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >>>>> P.O. Box 1 >>>>> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >>>>> lehto.paul at gmail.com >>>>> 906-204-4965 (cell) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >>> P.O. Box 1 >>> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >>> lehto.paul at gmail.com >>> 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Tue Oct 23 22:12:53 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 22:12:53 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote Message-ID: The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote. In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much influence that they even write the drafts of laws. But in multistakeholder situations they take that scandal to a whole new level: those who would be lobbyists in a democracy (corporations, experts, civil society) become the legislators themselves, and dispense with all public elections and not only write the laws but pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up courts of arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to go to the court system set up by democracies. A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law is just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. Multistakeholderism is a coup d'etat against democracy by those who would merely be lobbyists in a democratic system. So yes, I think it is misleading at best to use the word "democratic" in reference to multistakeholder systems. Paul R. Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 23 22:37:15 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 08:07:15 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote Message-ID: Most multistakeholder groups operate on a rough consensus model and are open to participation in a much wider set of mechanisms than a traditional democratic political process. So, while my traveling days look to be over thanks to a ban on conference travel at my workplace (which I don't speak for or represent here anyway), I still get to call a spade a spade on a mailing list, and so, try to influence consensus here to the best of my rather limited capacity Given that perspective I would still disagree to some extent with your points here, but this is something that I prefer be discussed to death (that is, any further than this rather huge thread has done so far) over a round of beers rather than on a mailing list .. cheers --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Paul Lehto" To: "Suresh Ramasubramanian" Cc: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "michael gurstein" Subject: In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote Date: Wed, Oct 24, 2012 7:42 AM The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote. In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much influence that they even write the drafts of laws. But in multistakeholder situations they take that scandal to a whole new level: those who would be lobbyists in a democracy (corporations, experts, civil society) become the legislators themselves, and dispense with all public elections and not only write the laws but pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up courts of arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to go to the court system set up by democracies. A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law is just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. Multistakeholderism is a coup d'etat against democracy by those who would merely be lobbyists in a democratic system. So yes, I think it is misleading at best to use the word "democratic" in reference to multistakeholder systems. Paul R. Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Wed Oct 24 01:03:58 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 05:03:58 +0000 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF82BB@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Paul, the theory in your posts is on track IMO. However it does not model the processes being discussed and therefore the conclusions are rather a non sequitur. Going back to the ICANN election which in part sparked this discussion, the electorate is not well formed. There is a basic, small electorate which pre-exists the election, and then there is the chance that each candidate will add a pool of followers whose vote is predetermined. As mentioned some time ago, this is the equivalent of the situation in poor regions of my country and others in which the party with the money or the power carries hundreds of voters to each precinct by trucking them in. The level of capture is unacceptably undemocratic even if there is no money exchanged nor any other benefit traded. A vote in this context can only work if the electorate comprises a huge fraction of the world's population. I hope the delusion of a single global government scares you as much as it does me, or at least appears as much of a delusion. We are left with multistakeholderism and managing its deficit if we actually want to get something done, while the larger issues get fixed or remain unsolved. Full awareness of the problem helps us curtail the abuses. And a lot of principled people are involved, genuinely invested in keeping the game fair and open. Checks and balances, as well as mechanisms to review, revise, and redress decisions, due process, etc. are being put in place and tested This may be a poor remedy for our haughty aspirations. But the alternatives are being tested as well and turning out worse. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de Paul Lehto [lehto.paul at gmail.com] Enviado el: martes, 23 de octubre de 2012 21:12 Hasta: Suresh Ramasubramanian CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; michael gurstein Asunto: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote. In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much influence that they even write the drafts of laws. But in multistakeholder situations they take that scandal to a whole new level: those who would be lobbyists in a democracy (corporations, experts, civil society) become the legislators themselves, and dispense with all public elections and not only write the laws but pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up courts of arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to go to the court system set up by democracies. A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law is just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. Multistakeholderism is a coup d'etat against democracy by those who would merely be lobbyists in a democratic system. So yes, I think it is misleading at best to use the word "democratic" in reference to multistakeholder systems. Paul R. Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 01:09:27 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:39:27 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <1135972384.76452.1351010172856.JavaMail.www@wwinf1e09> Message-ID: Yes Suresh well met - and blacklisting and data privacy become a concern too - which is why the reputation thing matters so much. Also data recovery, helpful staff - many points. So while technologically its up to scratch, theres much to do on other fronts. -C On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 5:45 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Softlayer has a datacenter in Singapore that it uses to service Asian > clients. Singapore being pretty much well connected and having great > infrastructure, I guess it is far easier that way. > > One other difference between soft layer and ctrls that you mentioned is > that soft layer has a comparatively smaller percentage of its ip addresses > in various block lists, while ctrls hosts rather a lot of email marketers > for an ISP their size.. Indian email marketers not, currently, being any > good at concepts like optin and customer privacy, that becomes tough for > ctrls to put it mildly > > --srs (iPad) > > On 23-Oct-2012, at 23:17, Chaitanya Dhareshwar > wrote: > > Thanks Jean-Louis! Just to be clear I'm not trying to dissuade here - it's > an admirable and very positive thing happening; just that (I keep saying > IMHO because that's what it is) it will not be a unilateral decision from > the governments - but it *will* be a unilateral decision from the *end > users*. Parminder I believe this addresses your question in a way as well. > > Plus even if we're able to provide a 24/7/365 setup - how many african > nations are likely to create DCs/outbound ISPs? And how many are likely to > be able to *sell* Africa-hosted clouds - *and make up their initial > investment in full*? > > In my view, making a specific comparison, it will be at least 2-3 years > before India can offer datacenter services that are considered on par (in > terms of cost/roi/performance ratio) with today's US/UK/AU/Europe > datacenter services, but that still does not mean that customers will buy > it. > > What can be done to help reduce the gap today would be a matter of much > conjecture - JVs and FDIs may help, franchising established foreign brands > may help to get the market growing faster in India (eg. Softlayer India > datacenter could have customers from developed countries that recognize the > Softlayer 'brand'). But as I said this is all guesswork. > > Plus I'm only talking DCs/ISPs - I feel the same or a similar concept > would apply for telecomms, automobiles/aircraft tech, weapons tech, and > some other similar fields where the *perceived value* can be higher than > the *true* *value*. > > Just my 2c. If it's value add do +1 :) > > -C > > > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK < > jlfullsack at orange.fr> wrote: > >> Maybe Chaitanya that you're right about digital divide widening due to >> "high speed clouds". In my opinion this isn't the only threat. >> >> >> >> Cloud networking requires a stable and 100% working network, i.e. >> datacenters inlusive. All network components (equipment, centers, O&M >> functionalities ...) need a stable and 24/7/365 electricity supply for >> their feeding. In most countries of Africa electricity supply is >> problematic, even in large cities. Therefore once you rely on distant SW >> and Data for working with your terminal (i.e. in the cloud), the risks of a >> "dark network" is sufficiently important for dissuading you from being >> cloud enthousiastic ! Not to speak about public services and business >> communications ! >> >> >> >> Best >> >> >> >> Jean-Louis Fullsack >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Message du 22/10/12 17:36 >> > De : "Chaitanya Dhareshwar" >> > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org, "Jean-Louis FULLSACK" >> > Copie à : "parminder" >> > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on >> the Internet Economy >> > >> > >> Increasing the digital divide more like - the fastest clouds would be in >> the most developed countries and thus the entire "cloud computing >> investment" will go: to the most developed countries. >> >> Unless the less developed ones are able to pull up excellent network >> speeds and stable datacenters. >> >> How many people here would choose CtrlS over Softlayer(Theplanet)? >> >> -C >> > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Jean-Louis FULLSACK < >> jlfullsack at orange.fr> wrote: >> > >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Isn't this a joke : >>> >>> > >>> >>> > ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the >>> following activities: >>> >>> > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international >>> framework to support cloud computing. >>> >>> > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and >>> reducing the digital divide. >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > Either these prominent experts from Japan and US never were staying in >>> African countries or they try to make us laughing ! I imagine the worries >>> of Internet users in these countries with cloud based Internet networking >>> in Cameroons or in Senegal (and a lot of others). For sure : they won't >>> laugh at all ! >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Best >>> >>> > >>> >>> > Jean-Louis Fullsack >>> >>> > >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> >>> > Message du 22/10/12 09:44 >>> > > De : "parminder" >>> > > A : governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> > > Copie à : >>> > > Objet : Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on >>> the Internet Economy >>> >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Sunday 21 October 2012 09:50 PM, Fahd A. Batayneh wrote: >>> > > >>> >>> The United States and Japan held the fourth Director General-level >>> meeting of the U.S.-Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet >>> Economy in Washington, D.C. >>> > > >>> > > >>> http://www.yumanewsnow.com/index.php/news/latest/1450-u-s-japan-policy-cooperation-dialogue-on-the-internet-economy >>> > > >>> >>> >>> > > From the agreement text: >>> > > >>> > > >>> >>> Encouraging other countries to develop principles consistent with the >>> “United States-Japan Trade Principles for Information and Communication >>> Technology Services. >>> > > >>> >>> >>> > > SNIP >>> > > >>> > > >>> >>> ........For these reasons, industry representatives suggested the >>> following activities: >>> >>> > > · U.S-Japan collaboration for establishing an international >>> framework to support cloud computing. >>> >>> > > · Promoting the use of cloud computing in developing countries and >>> reducing the digital divide. >>> >>> > > · Considering a range of policy issues, including: privacy, cloud >>> computing security, digital content, interoperability, and portability. >>> >>> >>> > > (quotes end) >>> > > >>> > > So rich countries merely go along developing 'global' principles for >>> the Internet, and to 'encourage' other countries to follow / adopt them. >>> Industry reps too want them to develop '*international *framework to >>> support cloud computing', to promote use of cloud computing in developing >>> countries, and to consider a range of policy issues.... >>> > > >>> > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made with a view to address >>> these global Internet policy issues at globally democratic spaces, not only >>> these developed countries, most hypocritically, cry foul, so does the >>> industry (here seen actively encouraging developed countries to do exactly >>> the same kind of work), and also, most disappointingly, the so called >>> global IG civil society. >>> > > >>> > > Perhaps it is time the global IG civil society stop being the B team >>> of developed countries' political and economic interests and really take up >>> the interests of the more marginalised that it is supposed to represent. >>> They need to develop an independent global IG agenda to be championed by >>> the civil society, which looks like something worth championing by civil >>> society. >>> > > >>> > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to >>> the active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy >>> principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global >>> Internet policy making. Fine if they dont like the CIRP proposal, come up >>> with something else. But the complicit silence is deafening. >>> > > >>> > > parminder >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> >>> >>> > > Fahd >>> > > >>> >>> >>> > > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >>> >>> >>> > ____________________________________________________________ >>> > 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 >>> > >>> > >> >> >> > >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 01:13:19 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:43:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <28291CD6-647D-4510-B707-DEDFEA0B676C@hserus.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF80EF@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <28291CD6-647D-4510-B707-DEDFEA0B676C@hserus.net> Message-ID: Yes I figured that was a given, not something we'd actually have to say out loud. Again if there were country level representation (from any country - maybe like India's IT Ministry or suchlike) approaching them I'm sure they would accomodate rather than refuse - it's fairly likely there hasnt been such a step (us discussing about it does not really count that way :) -C On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 5:53 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Certainly, if any two entities commit resources, experts etc and come up > with a useful set of best practices, which is what a framework is, when you > boil it down, it is out there, and for any country to adopt, or not, as it > suits them. > > Knowing the USA and Japan, industry and civil society is likely much > deeper engaged, and thus contributing a much hier level of expertise, than > in other countries where you would only get a token window dressing level > of presence from non government stakeholders. So I would count that as a > second plus. > > When we talk of multistakeholderism, we need to beware of demanding a > stake "just because". Unless there is something significant .. Not > necessarily money ... to contribute. > > --srs (iPad) > > On 24-Oct-2012, at 3:52, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" > wrote: > > Parminder, > > as Wolfgang Pauli reputedly said, "it isn't even wrong". > > I wont let this discussion distract you from preparing comments to the > article McTim and Suresh have pointed to. > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > ------------------------------ > *Desde:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de parminder [ > parminder at itforchange.net] > *Enviado el:* martes, 23 de octubre de 2012 03:07 > *Hasta:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Asunto:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on > the Internet Economy > > > Alejandro/ Chaitanya, > > On Tuesday 23 October 2012 10:27 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > > Chaitanya, > > thanks! so, not much of an Internet Governance aspect to this issue > left. > > > In fact, the primary internet 'Governance' question posed in my initial > posting remains and has not been addressed at all, with the discussion > swerving towards operational issues. > > I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework > to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and > developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. > > And since Alejandro mentions 'ugly imperialists' , I will like to say that > it is in unilaterally imposing governance frameworks developed by rich > countries over the whole world that 'ugly imperialism' comes in. You do all > the governance work, and if developing countries want to do it, call them > as despots out to control the Internet, and for good measure, co-opt a > willing civil society into the game. > > > parminder > > > On to the next one. > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, > http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > ------------------------------ > *Desde:* Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] > *Enviado el:* lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 21:08 > *Hasta:* Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > *CC:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Asunto:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on > the Internet Economy > > Hi Alex, > > I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or anything > else) here - its just that even when these facilities are provided and > available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par with Softlayer in > most ways - except most importantly it's location. > > End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and > ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and > without the revenue stream even the best won't be *able to *be there very > long. > > -C > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < > apisan at unam.mx> wrote: > >> Chaitanya, >> >> let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. >> >> Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in >> Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the >> Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three >> supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 >> processors.) The key to the design was that the communication between the >> computers would never be more than an order of magnitude slower than the >> fiber inside the computers so we would not be working with batch jobs but >> some level of synched computing power for big science problems like >> computerized fluid dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. >> >> This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to >> train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud >> computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for >> several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's >> beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do >> things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the >> subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, >> bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. >> >> Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got >> to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several >> hundred engineers we would have. >> >> Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit >> that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before >> blaming it all on them? >> >> Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable >> datacenters" while "they" can? >> >> Alejandro Pisanty >> >> >> ! !! !!! !!!! >> > ____________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Oct 24 01:38:37 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:08:37 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <1453814231.27365.1350908773571.JavaMail.www@wwinf1m12> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF2602@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF4976@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <50865036.2020901@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF80EF@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> <28291CD6-647D-4510-B707-DEDFEA0B676C@hserus.net> Message-ID: So, why characterize this as "imperialism", if two countries discuss public private cooperation initiatives? That's an ugly word - even uglier when it comes from civil society which should be careful about using innuendo and loaded words to substitute for reasoned arguments. [one long standing argument I have had with various rather well known free speech and network neutrality advocates is their tendency to use words like "blackmail", "inside job", "spy" etc when talking about, say, spam filtering or deep packet inspection for security rather than to mine customer data for marketing purposes]. --srs (iPad) On 24-Oct-2012, at 10:43, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > Yes I figured that was a given, not something we'd actually have to say out loud. > > Again if there were country level representation (from any country - maybe like India's IT Ministry or suchlike) approaching them I'm sure they would accomodate rather than refuse - it's fairly likely there hasnt been such a step (us discussing about it does not really count that way :) > > -C > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 5:53 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Certainly, if any two entities commit resources, experts etc and come up with a useful set of best practices, which is what a framework is, when you boil it down, it is out there, and for any country to adopt, or not, as it suits them. >> >> Knowing the USA and Japan, industry and civil society is likely much deeper engaged, and thus contributing a much hier level of expertise, than in other countries where you would only get a token window dressing level of presence from non government stakeholders. So I would count that as a second plus. >> >> When we talk of multistakeholderism, we need to beware of demanding a stake "just because". Unless there is something significant .. Not necessarily money ... to contribute. >> >> --srs (iPad) >> >> On 24-Oct-2012, at 3:52, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" wrote: >> >>> Parminder, >>> >>> as Wolfgang Pauli reputedly said, "it isn't even wrong". >>> >>> I wont let this discussion distract you from preparing comments to the article McTim and Suresh have pointed to. >>> >>> Yours, >>> >>> Alejandro Pisanty >>> >>> >>> ! !! !!! !!!! >>> NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO >>> >>> >>> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >>> >>> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO >>> >>> SMS +525541444475 >>> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >>> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >>> >>> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com >>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty >>> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 >>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty >>> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org >>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >>> >>> Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de parminder [parminder at itforchange.net] >>> Enviado el: martes, 23 de octubre de 2012 03:07 >>> Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>> Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy >>> >>> >>> Alejandro/ Chaitanya, >>> >>> On Tuesday 23 October 2012 10:27 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: >>>> Chaitanya, >>>> >>>> thanks! so, not much of an Internet Governance aspect to this issue left. >>> >>> In fact, the primary internet 'Governance' question posed in my initial posting remains and has not been addressed at all, with the discussion swerving towards operational issues. >>> >>> I had asked, why should US and Japan develop "an international framework to support cloud computing" and not all countries - developed and developing - together do it? Any responses to this primary IG question. >>> >>> And since Alejandro mentions 'ugly imperialists' , I will like to say that it is in unilaterally imposing governance frameworks developed by rich countries over the whole world that 'ugly imperialism' comes in. You do all the governance work, and if developing countries want to do it, call them as despots out to control the Internet, and for good measure, co-opt a willing civil society into the game. >>> >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>>> On to the next one. >>>> >>>> Yours, >>>> >>>> Alejandro Pisanty >>>> >>>> >>>> ! !! !!! !!!! >>>> NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO >>>> >>>> >>>> +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD >>>> >>>> +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO >>>> >>>> SMS +525541444475 >>>> Dr. Alejandro Pisanty >>>> UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico >>>> >>>> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com >>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty >>>> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 >>>> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty >>>> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org >>>> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >>>> >>>> Desde: Chaitanya Dhareshwar [chaitanyabd at gmail.com] >>>> Enviado el: lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012 21:08 >>>> Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch >>>> CC: governance at lists.igcaucus.org >>>> Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy >>>> >>>> Hi Alex, >>>> >>>> I'm not blaming developing countries (or developed countries or anything else) here - its just that even when these facilities are provided and available the buyers are few. My example CtrlS is on par with Softlayer in most ways - except most importantly it's location. >>>> >>>> End of the day getting the system up from the investment capital and ensuring it has a workable revenue stream become quite different - and without the revenue stream even the best won't be able to be there very long. >>>> >>>> -C >>>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:36 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: >>>>> Chaitanya, >>>>> >>>>> let me tell you a short story about clouds and grids in the real world. >>>>> >>>>> Several years ago in the consortium for the Internet-2 project in Mexico I (while Academic-CIO at UNAM) got funds for a project, the Metropolitan Supercomputing Delta, which would interconnect three supercomputers at high speed (ours was a Top-500 when purchased, 1,300 processors.) The key to the design was that the communication between the computers would never be more than an order of magnitude slower than the fiber inside the computers so we would not be working with batch jobs but some level of synched computing power for big science problems like computerized fluid dynamics, quantum chemistry, etc. >>>>> >>>>> This would become a National Reference Laboratory and a great place to train people in grids and a stepping stone toward provisioning cloud computing. The project was authorized but the funds were not released for several years (in the meantime I left that job.) Well, it's 2012 and it's beginning to work because it took years to go across the regulations to do things like dig trenches to cross a sidewalk between a university and the subway to connect to a fiber there and other stuff like that. Inefficiency, bureaucracy, lack of vision, petty politics, all played a role. >>>>> >>>>> Darned missed opportunity, darned high opportunity cost: we never got to train, hands-on and in critical, bleeding edfe, operations, the several hundred engineers we would have. >>>>> >>>>> Is this the fault of the ugly imperialists out there? Or will we admit that in developing countries we have some laundry of our own to wash before blaming it all on them? >>>>> >>>>> Why can't we, quoting you, "pull up excellent network speeds and stable datacenters" while "they" can? >>>>> >>>>> Alejandro Pisanty >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ! !! !!! !!!! >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> >>> 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 >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Wed Oct 24 05:10:29 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 02:10:29 -0700 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? Message-ID: <5087b085.BXMq7lGN0DRLLxC5%suresh@hserus.net> Replying to an email of Riaz Tayob's - posted in the archives - As far as I can see dotconnectafrica shot themselves in their own foot by first bidding for the wrong TLD, and then launching an extremely vitriolic attack campaign against anybody at all they saw as opposed to their interests. This on circleid for example was the first I heard of this group and their campaign, and it failed to impress me right at the start. http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_africa_ready_for_a_dotafrica_gtld_future/ http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121008_icann_africa_strategy_a_new_approach_to_africa/ Anything at all more on this issue will have to be seen from the prism of dueling commercial interests, one of which has apparently lost out but is still aggressively claiming victory. This article says it all - http://domainincite.com/9802-dotconnectafrica-disconnected-from-reality thanks --srs On 2012/10/12 04:11 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of the > extortion screw", Whatever does this mean? -------------- 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 From george.sadowsky at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 09:11:47 2012 From: george.sadowsky at gmail.com (George Sadowsky) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:11:47 -0400 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <5087b085.BXMq7lGN0DRLLxC5%suresh@hserus.net> References: <5087b085.BXMq7lGN0DRLLxC5%suresh@hserus.net> Message-ID: <4A54F426-A451-4E39-92C2-0A3C6FCA7B5A@gmail.com> Suresh, Speaking personally, I agree completely with your assessment of this situation I wish that there were more post of this type in this list, directly assessing such issues without the various biases that appear to affect so many of the contributors. George On Oct 24, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Replying to an email of Riaz Tayob's - posted in the archives - > > As far as I can see dotconnectafrica shot themselves in their own foot by first > bidding for the wrong TLD, and then launching an extremely vitriolic attack > campaign against anybody at all they saw as opposed to their interests. > > This on circleid for example was the first I heard of this group and their > campaign, and it failed to impress me right at the start. > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_africa_ready_for_a_dotafrica_gtld_future/ > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121008_icann_africa_strategy_a_new_approach_to_africa/ > > Anything at all more on this issue will have to be seen from the prism of > dueling commercial interests, one of which has apparently lost out but is still > aggressively claiming victory. > > This article says it all - > http://domainincite.com/9802-dotconnectafrica-disconnected-from-reality > > thanks > --srs > > On 2012/10/12 04:11 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > >> the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of the >> extortion screw", > > Whatever does this mean? > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ajp at glocom.ac.jp Wed Oct 24 09:44:53 2012 From: ajp at glocom.ac.jp (Adam Peake) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 22:44:53 +0900 Subject: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM In-Reply-To: References: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> Message-ID: I guess Amazon's using some regional content control. Long been regional control on the sale of video and DVD, and you can't buy MP3 from Amazon unless you're in the right territory (I've a UK proxy server, used to be able to buy MP3s from Amazon UK, but they can now detect I'm in Japan and can't buy, can't give the music industry money :-)) Why it would do that on books only an IP lawyer with their head firmly up their own (self interest) would know. So I can rant: I enjoy a radio program called "desert island discs". I guess everyone in the UK knows it, been broadcast for 70 years. Simple format, each week a well-known (sometimes not so well known) person is invited to bring in 8 records they'd take with them if marooned alone on a desert island. Through questions about the songs, why they are important to the guest, we hear about a life, and 8 songs are played. Parts of 8 songs, not the whole, usually a couple of minutes. The whole program's only 45 minutes So someone reasonably famous is playing 8 songs they like. They say why they like them, why they are important to them. Very rare for there to be anything from a current chart. And the BBC has now made most of the episodes available on line. Hundreds of interviews, each plugging a bit of nostalgia. The most recent guest is Mona Siddiqui (Martina Navratilova's also there, Goldie Hawn, Vidal Sassoon, Bob Geldof, Norman Schwarzkopf, Stephen Hawking... and on and on and on.) And for rights reason, in the download version they have to cut the music to about 15 seconds. Not even the 30 seconds free listen you get on iTunes or Amazon. A well known person, perhaps a Muslim theologian (Mona Siddiqui) not so many have heard of, but there she is, plugging records, reminding us how much we like UB40, and for rights reasons we can't hear more than a few bars. And downloading it killing the music industry. Not. Adam (at the moment only sure about 5 songs out of 8, good thing I'm not famous) -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 09:54:49 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:54:49 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF82BB@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> References: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF82BB@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan at unam.mx> wrote: > Paul, > > the theory in your posts is on track IMO. > > Thanks, though it is more than just theory, it is an explication of fundamental human rights that clearly state (in somewhat different but equivalent words) that legitimacy in governance is created only from representative governance. However it does not model the processes being discussed and therefore the > conclusions are rather a non sequitur. > I derive a series of "tests" from this related to minimum standards that are applicable to all governance systems creating enforceable laws or regulations, and then I apply these tests to any process being discussed, so there is no possibility of non sequitur in terms of whether my tests apply to governance fact patterns or not, only the question of whether the tests are being applied correctly or not. Justifications for MS rest on the alleged expertise of stakeholders and the alleged ignorance of voters. As to ignorance, this is always the justification for non-democratic systems. But if you think about it, even experts and informed voters do not become fully informed until "the last second" - after a process of becoming informed and listening to other points of view. The allegation that someone is presently uninformed about a question that is not coming up very soon for a binding vote of some sort is to be expected of nearly every voter and even nearly every expert, at least until the last moment. Nobody has all the answers in their own head, this is why we have meetings and discussions to access the wisdom of the whole. But as to democracy, centuries of input by many generations have perfected the minimum standards for democratic justice and these standards have been ratified in innumerable treaties and constitutions, starting with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. > > Going back to the ICANN election which in part sparked this discussion, > the electorate is not well formed. There is a basic, small electorate which > pre-exists the election, and then there is the chance that each candidate > will add a pool of followers whose vote is predetermined. > > As mentioned some time ago, this is the equivalent of the situation in > poor regions of my country and others in which the party with the money or > the power carries hundreds of voters to each precinct by trucking them in. > The level of capture is unacceptably undemocratic even if there is no money > exchanged nor any other benefit traded. > The fact or allegation that more democratic means can be and sometimes are corrupted does not mean that more just and democratic means should not be sought. > > A vote in this context can only work if the electorate comprises a huge > fraction of the world's population. I hope the delusion of a single global > government scares you as much as it does me, or at least appears as much of > a delusion. > MS systems with worldwide impact - which presently exist - are forms of world government/governance. I don't agree that this hobgoblin of "world government" necessarily should scare anyone away from minimum standards of democratic justice in the form of a ballot. Many voters are more than happy to stay away from voting in elections which they do not feel themselves sufficiently informed on, and are also willing to inform themselves sufficiently if there is real reason to do so in the form of a binding vote coming up in the very near future. > > We are left with multistakeholderism and managing its deficit if we > actually want to get something done, while the larger issues get fixed or > remain unsolved. Full awareness of the problem helps us curtail the abuses. > And a lot of principled people are involved, genuinely invested in keeping > the game fair and open. Checks and balances, as well as mechanisms to > review, revise, and redress decisions, due process, etc. are being put in > place and tested > I think the main take away, and the main cause of this most recent discussion in this thread, is not ICANN per se but the suggestion that MS systems are democracy, perhaps even in its highest form. This idea is nonsense. Rather, MS systems - if they are necessary for the moment because no electoral systems are presently set up - need to constantly work towards legitimacy by instituting voting for representatives instead of holding themselves up as "democratic" when they are not. Voting for a representative is a far cry from the technical sophistication that may often be required in the votes that the representative makes after being elected. > > This may be a poor remedy for our haughty aspirations. But the > alternatives are being tested as well and turning out worse. > There is no worse alternative than being subject to the regulation of a body that can not be democratically dissolved or changed if it is oppressive or ineffectual because there is no voting.... When you say something is "worse" you are implying, but not stating, some standard by which you are judging this. Though I don't know your standards, most often one of these standards is the desire for "correct" and "wise" positions. Here, some humility is in order because all of us always think we have the "right" answers after we've informed ourselves, and that other answers are therefore wrong. We may fear changes in policy and regulation and believe that such would be "wrong", and the prospect of expanding the franchise for governance purposes raises the specter of "right" decisions being reversed and becoming "wrong." But we also know intellectually after reflection that we are not perfect and are occasionally or frequently wrong without even knowing it at the time. Each one of us, once we arrive at what we think is a "good idea", tends very highly to have a little dictator inside of us that wishes to enforce this good idea on everyone else because we feel it will be right or in the best interests of all. But our own egos -- even should they be right - is insufficient justification for denying those who will be governed the minimum standard of a vote on the representatives who will make regulation and policy. Perhaps if I were somehow appointed as a MS official I would relate more to the fears that others will make big mistakes if they too are allowed a say in governance. But right now I don't have that conflict of interest, and I can see that if I were to say that it would reflect my own judgment being impaired by the fact that I hold power and don't wish to let that power go even in part because I would think that I'm doing the right thing and acting in the public interest. But this feeling - the one that gets in the way of further democracy - is really a delusion of the ego of those who are invested in MS processes and have disproportionate power and don't wish to give it away. Again, once people are recognized as having a vote, and once it matters, they do get informed, and usually do so at the last second before a binding election or vote. The alleged fact that people are ignorant about some question that it would be idle for them to inform themselves on at the present moment really says nothing against further democracy. Anybody holding power in a MS system, IMO, should never be satisfied with present governance systems by rationalizing that other alternatives are somehow unacceptable. Instead, they should be perpetually unsatisfied until democratic systems of governance can be instituted. Paul Lehto, J.D. > > The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, those > who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote. > > In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much influence that > they even write the drafts of laws. But in multistakeholder situations > they take that scandal to a whole new level: those who would be lobbyists > in a democracy (corporations, experts, civil society) become the > legislators themselves, and dispense with all public elections and not only > write the laws but pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up > courts of arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to > go to the court system set up by democracies. > > A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law is > just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. Multistakeholderism is a > coup d'etat against democracy by those who would merely be lobbyists in a > democratic system. So yes, I think it is misleading at best to use the > word "democratic" in reference to multistakeholder systems. > > Paul R. Lehto, J.D > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 09:58:45 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:58:45 -0400 Subject: OFF TOPIC Re: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM Message-ID: For those of us who share the urge to rant - please allow me to remind you of/draw your attention to Walter Miller's A Canticle for Leibowitz. I think I found it full text somewhere - where it should be - but Amazon has it too. Perhaps we should all become digital bookleggers? Deirdre On 24 October 2012 09:44, Adam Peake wrote: > I guess Amazon's using some regional content control. Long been > regional control on the sale of video and DVD, and you can't buy MP3 > from Amazon unless you're in the right territory (I've a UK proxy > server, used to be able to buy MP3s from Amazon UK, but they can now > detect I'm in Japan and can't buy, can't give the music industry money > :-)) Why it would do that on books only an IP lawyer with their head > firmly up their own (self interest) would know. > > So I can rant: I enjoy a radio program called "desert island discs". > I guess everyone in the UK knows it, been broadcast for 70 years. > Simple format, each week a well-known (sometimes not so well known) > person is invited to bring in 8 records they'd take with them if > marooned alone on a desert island. Through questions about the songs, > why they are important to the guest, we hear about a life, and 8 songs > are played. Parts of 8 songs, not the whole, usually a couple of > minutes. The whole program's only 45 minutes > > So someone reasonably famous is playing 8 songs they like. They say > why they like them, why they are important to them. Very rare for > there to be anything from a current chart. And the BBC has now made > most of the episodes available on line. Hundreds of interviews, each > plugging a bit of nostalgia. The most recent guest is Mona Siddiqui > (Martina Navratilova's also there, Goldie Hawn, Vidal Sassoon, Bob > Geldof, Norman Schwarzkopf, Stephen Hawking... and on and on and on.) > > And for rights reason, in the download version they have to cut the > music to about 15 seconds. Not even the 30 seconds free listen you > get on iTunes or Amazon. > > A well known person, perhaps a Muslim theologian (Mona Siddiqui) not > so many have heard of, but there she is, plugging records, reminding > us how much we like UB40, and for rights reasons we can't hear more > than a few bars. And downloading it killing the music industry. Not. > > Adam (at the moment only sure about 5 songs out of 8, good thing I'm not > famous) > -- “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: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 10:26:46 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:26:46 -0400 Subject: [governance] Amazon Allegedly Deletes Customer's Kindle; Incident Triggers Discussion About Ebooks, DRM In-Reply-To: References: <50868981.6090906@gmail.com> Message-ID: This just appeared on the BBC site http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-20046568 Amazon and Waterstones get together. Deirdre On 24 October 2012 09:44, Adam Peake wrote: > I guess Amazon's using some regional content control. Long been > regional control on the sale of video and DVD, and you can't buy MP3 > from Amazon unless you're in the right territory (I've a UK proxy > server, used to be able to buy MP3s from Amazon UK, but they can now > detect I'm in Japan and can't buy, can't give the music industry money > :-)) Why it would do that on books only an IP lawyer with their head > firmly up their own (self interest) would know. > > So I can rant: I enjoy a radio program called "desert island discs". > I guess everyone in the UK knows it, been broadcast for 70 years. > Simple format, each week a well-known (sometimes not so well known) > person is invited to bring in 8 records they'd take with them if > marooned alone on a desert island. Through questions about the songs, > why they are important to the guest, we hear about a life, and 8 songs > are played. Parts of 8 songs, not the whole, usually a couple of > minutes. The whole program's only 45 minutes > > So someone reasonably famous is playing 8 songs they like. They say > why they like them, why they are important to them. Very rare for > there to be anything from a current chart. And the BBC has now made > most of the episodes available on line. Hundreds of interviews, each > plugging a bit of nostalgia. The most recent guest is Mona Siddiqui > (Martina Navratilova's also there, Goldie Hawn, Vidal Sassoon, Bob > Geldof, Norman Schwarzkopf, Stephen Hawking... and on and on and on.) > > And for rights reason, in the download version they have to cut the > music to about 15 seconds. Not even the 30 seconds free listen you > get on iTunes or Amazon. > > A well known person, perhaps a Muslim theologian (Mona Siddiqui) not > so many have heard of, but there she is, plugging records, reminding > us how much we like UB40, and for rights reasons we can't hear more > than a few bars. And downloading it killing the music industry. Not. > > Adam (at the moment only sure about 5 songs out of 8, good thing I'm not > famous) > -- “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: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 10:36:03 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 10:36:03 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF82BB@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > wrote: >> >> Paul, >> >> the theory in your posts is on track IMO. >> > Thanks, though it is more than just theory, it is an explication of > fundamental human rights that clearly state (in somewhat different but > equivalent words) that legitimacy in governance is created only from > representative governance. Why do I need to rely on an intermediary when I can represent myself? -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From anriette at apc.org Wed Oct 24 10:44:41 2012 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 16:44:41 +0200 Subject: [governance] WSIS goals: what happened to them? Message-ID: <5087FED9.206@apc.org> Dear all, APC would like to invite civil society organisations that participated in the WSIS process and that are concerned in some way with the WSIS goal of building a 'people-centred information society' to participate in a survey we are conducting as part of our WSIS +10 efforts. The survey's goal is to assess civil society's views on progress (or lack of progress) in achieving the WSIS goals, particularly the goals that we put in the civil society declaration in 2003: "Shaping the information society for human needs". www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/civil-society-declaration.pdf The survey is available at: The deadline for completing the survey is: Monday 5 November 2012. IGC people's inputs are really essential to this process. Please try to make the time to respond. Best regards, Anriette -- ------------------------------------------------------ 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 -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Wed Oct 24 11:57:34 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 11:57:34 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59EF82BB@W8-EX10MB.unam.local> Message-ID: On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 10:36 AM, McTim wrote: > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 1:03 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > > wrote: > >> > >> Paul, > >> > >> the theory in your posts is on track IMO. > >> > > Thanks, though it is more than just theory, it is an explication of > > fundamental human rights that clearly state (in somewhat different but > > equivalent words) that legitimacy in governance is created only from > > representative governance. > > Why do I need to rely on an intermediary when I can represent myself? > > > In "local" matters, direct democracy should prevail and "town meetings" can and do work quite well to decide matters, given both their local nature and the relatively small number of people. But where large numbers of people are involved and/or great distances are involved, it is quite impractical to have direct democracy with everyone representing themselves on all issues (perhaps referenda which are few in number is a modest exception). In cases of large numbers of people affected or large distances, representation has always been considered the way to go because we don't have stadiums that will hold five or ten million people nor enough time to allow each to represent or speak for themselves. To answer McTim's question about why he needs to rely on an intermediary, I will assume that matter in question affects a large number of people who therefore have a right to vote on the matter and representatives are involved, and answer as follows: You don't get to BOTH vote *and* "represent yourself" in person without an intermediary because (1) you, like everyone else, are not really superior to the rest of the public in terms of who deserves to have their vote recognized simply because you may prefer not to delegate your vote-power to a representative, and (2) in many or most cases necessary deliberation and votes take place all around the world that most can not afford to travel to, in many cases, and (3) besides, if you really want to "represent yourself" you can still travel and be a lobbyist on the representatives and thereby speak for yourself without simultaneously taking those who can't afford that or don't have the time for that largely or completely out of the game because as a practical matter they can only participate via representation. But wherever practical, direct democracy without representation is the best way to go. Yet practicality involving geographic distances and numbers of people often compels representative systems. Paul Lehto, J.D. > -- > Cheers, > > McTim > "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A > route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From charityg at diplomacy.edu Wed Oct 24 19:42:38 2012 From: charityg at diplomacy.edu (Charity Gamboa) Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 18:42:38 -0500 Subject: [governance] Access for Disabled Persons - [Access for All] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just my thoughts on this... Working on the Education field, I would like to use the word "accommodations" when it comes giving ICT access to people with disability. I can give you some instances on how we do "accommodations" for people with disabilities: [1] Each semester typically in a US university, $1200 is allocated through state funding for students to avail of one-on-one tutoring. Tutoring includes assistance in the use of online coursework. Students usually apply for financial aid to avail of these services. Braille keyboards are available. Here at Texas Tech University, we have a student laboratory with braille keyboard. The monitors are a lot bigger, too. [2] Textbooks are converted to a media file that students can listen to. We have a couple of student assistants who are special education majors working with our Student Disability Services who do the media conversion. Our special education program was ranked 11th best in the nation so that might speak of the accommodations that we do. [3] When deaf/mute students need to call (we usually use Lync), the deaf/mute interpreter uses a TV attached to the phone to be able to converse with the student. [4] There are trained tutors who work with students on specific field of study - Engineering, Business, English and Science. I work with Science majors specifically Physics and Chemistry and I usually work in the Lab with them in accessing their coursework and what they need in the classroom. I use Quizlet a lot for vocabulary and I help students use the Internet to make their flashcards. [5] I have also used VI software and they can be installed in a thumb drive. You plug in the thumb drive into any computer and it starts automatically. For several weeks I have worked with VI students who were struggling a lot with a Business Computing course I was teaching in another workforce development program with a local college. I had to use magnification software. My company was compelled to ask assistance from the Texas DARS (*Department of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services*) Division for Blind Services (DBS). *DARS *usually would provide a magnification screen for computers so VI people can use computers better. I'd like to think that in terms of "*access to all*" for people requiring special services, it is indeed a priority. That priority makes "* accommodations*" come into place. When we actually accommodate them, we take that extra effort to help them. Usually most services are in place. I've seen it and I've worked with it. If we push people to see and understand that accommodations are necessary, they will be compelled to look for resources for software, equipment and even personnel training. Most governments are hard to convince so a lot of funding have been from private donors. I would really like to see the word '*accommodations*" being used a lot side by side with "*access*." Maybe that would give a lot of people insight on what needs to be done. Charity Gamboa-Embley Texas Tech University Student Disability Services On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > People take using the Internet for granted and we have persons in our > community who despite extraordinary challenges go to great lengths to > access the internet. One of the things that saddens me is how it continues > to remain an area least prioritised as far as Freedom of Expression goes. > Even when the UN Special Rapporteur Frank La Rue wrote about his , Report > on Freedom of Expression in relation to the Internet, Access for Disabled > Persons was relegated to the last paragraph in what I thought was a "By the > way...off handed comment", at least in my reading of the same. > > Whilst there is a United Nations Convention on Rights of Persons with > Disabilities on this area, see: > http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.asp?id=150 , there are 154 > countries that have signed up and only 125 have ratified, you can check to > see which countries have ratified by going to the link. > > *Accessibility* > > I know that the Australian Government have through various initiatives > made ICT accessible for disabled persons as has been reported to the > community from Gunela Astbrink, there is still a lot of room for > improvement. This includes things like handsets that can be easily used by > those who are visually challenged. I will never forget sitting in a > CommunicAsia meeting in Singapore and hearing Skype CEO back then talk > about how Skype had revolutionised communication. > > *Website Accessibility* > * > * > Last year at the PACINET in American Samoa in a session organised by > Gunela Astbrink from ISOC Australia,in an extraordinary advocate who has > been pushing access for disabled persons for many years in Australia, > within the region and internationally, Faaolo Utumapu from Samoa > demonstrated how her screen reading software with speech synthesis works > and how she can navigate through accessible websites. She also demonstrated > how barriers are placed in front of her when websites are not accessible. > > For websites to be able to be completely accessible, there are various > standards developed to help cater for these. A good resource site is: > http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-WCAG-EM-20120920/ > > *Hungary Proposal to the WCIT [8b on Access for Disabled Persons]* > > Whilst there are Resolutions in place from the Plenipotentiaries which > resulted in the creation of a Fund, it was reported to the Caribbean WCIT > Preparation that only Cyprus had contributed to the same. There is a > proposal by Hungary to add 8(b) and it includes excellent Access provisions > for disabled persons and countries should support Hungary's Proposal. > > > Kind Regards, > > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Thu Oct 25 05:11:17 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 14:41:17 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <50890235.2020206@itforchange.net> On Monday 22 October 2012 11:02 PM, McTim wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > wrote: > > > snip > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made > > > > This article, while certainly out of date given the recent detente > twixt ICANN and Minister Pilot India always had a pretty good relationship, and worked closely, with ICANN. ( If I remember right they also hosted the GAC secretariat for a while.) CIRP proposal has or had no intention to interfere with the working of ICANN. This is the simple fact and it has been made clear so many times. However, it suits some people to keep repeating this blatant misconception. CIRP however does have a problem with US oversight of ICANN, and my understanding is that almost all countries other than the US see this as a problem. Since the detractors of CIRP cant defend the indefensible (US's unilateral oversight over ICANN which WGIG as well as Tunis Agenda - documents with wide support, clearly speak against) they create the strawman - 'CIRP is against ICANN' and then valiantly fight that strawman. The fact that such a patently devious strategy continues to hold some credibility just speaks of the immense power of the powerful in the IG space. It gets even worse when the civil society in the IG arena also chooses to side with the powerful and wilfully closes its eyes to clearly manifest facts. Little surprise then that a UK company owned tabloid in India goes even further and calls CIRP as a proposal to create a committee to filter content. The proof of the power in the IG space is, for instance, that no one ever says that OECD's CICCP (its committee on Internet policy) does content filtering. May I ask you why is it so when CIRP seeks to mostly do the same work as OECD's CICCP already does. If OECD's CICCP is a content filtering committee then maybe CIRP is also proposed to be one. BTW, OECD last year developed Internet Policy Principles that seek to provide policy/ normative cover to private policing of content on the Internet, and so, perhaps it is a better candidate to be called a content filtering committee if one simply insists that a broad policy advisory committee is indeed to be called a content filtering committee. > discusses the birth of CIRP at some length: > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2220692/How-India-helped-bunch-bureaucrats-custodians-Internet.html > I really do not know what kind of response do you expect me to give to an article which is such a mix of facts, untruths and innuendos. An article which calls CIRP as a content filtering committee, thinks that the proposal that CIRP should have a working relationship with the IGF is a deep conspiracy, and considers Brazil and South Africa as countries India should absolutely never work with, because " "Brazil had military dictators till a few years ago and South Africa had apartheid written into its law”. ??? . And is further most so very enamoured of " 'Indo-US goodwill' and 'bilateral friendship' " and unwilling to take any criticism of US's role in global IG. > It doesn't sound like there was a whole lot of MSism going on, at > least not the kind of MSism I have witnessed. Not sure if you are speaking of MSism in developing the proposal, or MSism vis a vis CIRP itself. However since there are others (Suresh, Alejandro) who look quite pleased to see the Daily Mail article. Unpleasant though the task is, I cant but dampen their spirits by putting some facts about (1) the background of CIRP, and (2) nature and justification of CIRP, in two separate emails. That a bit later in the day... parminder > > -- > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Oct 25 05:48:22 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:18:22 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Message-ID: That says quite a lot without saying anything very much I am afraid. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "parminder" To: Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Date: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 2:41 PM On Monday 22 October 2012 11:02 PM, McTim wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > wrote: > > > snip > > And when proposals like UN CIRP are made > > > > This article, while certainly out of date given the recent detente > twixt ICANN and Minister Pilot India always had a pretty good relationship, and worked closely, with ICANN. ( If I remember right they also hosted the GAC secretariat for a while.) CIRP proposal has or had no intention to interfere with the working of ICANN. This is the simple fact and it has been made clear so many times. However, it suits some people to keep repeating this blatant misconception. CIRP however does have a problem with US oversight of ICANN, and my understanding is that almost all countries other than the US see this as a problem. Since the detractors of CIRP cant defend the indefensible (US's unilateral oversight over ICANN which WGIG as well as Tunis Agenda - documents with wide support, clearly speak against) they create the strawman - 'CIRP is against ICANN' and then valiantly fight that strawman. The fact that such a patently devious strategy continues to hold some credibility just speaks of the immense power of the powerful in the IG space. It gets even worse when the civil society in the IG arena also chooses to side with the powerful and wilfully closes its eyes to clearly manifest facts. Little surprise then that a UK company owned tabloid in India goes even further and calls CIRP as a proposal to create a committee to filter content. The proof of the power in the IG space is, for instance, that no one ever says that OECD's CICCP (its committee on Internet policy) does content filtering. May I ask you why is it so when CIRP seeks to mostly do the same work as OECD's CICCP already does. If OECD's CICCP is a content filtering committee then maybe CIRP is also proposed to be one. BTW, OECD last year developed Internet Policy Principles that seek to provide policy/ normative cover to private policing of content on the Internet, and so, perhaps it is a better candidate to be called a content filtering committee if one simply insists that a broad policy advisory committee is indeed to be called a content filtering committee. > discusses the birth of CIRP at some length: > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2220692/How-India-helped-bunch-bureaucrats-custodians-Internet.html > I really do not know what kind of response do you expect me to give to an article which is such a mix of facts, untruths and innuendos. An article which calls CIRP as a content filtering committee, thinks that the proposal that CIRP should have a working relationship with the IGF is a deep conspiracy, and considers Brazil and South Africa as countries India should absolutely never work with, because " "Brazil had military dictators till a few years ago and South Africa had apartheid written into its law”. ??? . And is further most so very enamoured of " 'Indo-US goodwill' and 'bilateral friendship' " and unwilling to take any criticism of US's role in global IG. > It doesn't sound like there was a whole lot of MSism going on, at > least not the kind of MSism I have witnessed. Not sure if you are speaking of MSism in developing the proposal, or MSism vis a vis CIRP itself. However since there are others (Suresh, Alejandro) who look quite pleased to see the Daily Mail article. Unpleasant though the task is, I cant but dampen their spirits by putting some facts about (1) the background of CIRP, and (2) nature and justification of CIRP, in two separate emails. That a bit later in the day... parminder > > -- > 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: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 09:11:46 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:11:46 +0300 Subject: [governance] Commission's Plan for Online Gambling: Risk of Anti-Democratic Censorship, Again In-Reply-To: <460dd76a945aa082f4a37b688d6e7c0d@localhost.localdomain> References: <460dd76a945aa082f4a37b688d6e7c0d@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <50893A92.9060909@gmail.com> Themes: NET FILTERING, UE COMMISSION, CENSORSHIP, ONLINE GAMBLING La Quadrature du Net – For immediate release Permanent link: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/commissions-plan-for-online-gambling-risk-of-anti-democratic-censorship-again Commission's Plan for Online Gambling: Risk of Anti-Democratic Censorship, Again *** Paris, 24 October 2012 – While the European Commission sets out an action plan for online gambling [1], La Quadrature du Net warns about the risk of Internet content censorship, and urges Member States's governments to refuse the instrumentalisation of child protection for unacceptable measures. *** In the name of child protection and of the fight against money laundering and fraud, the European Commission is once again encouraging the development of online content filters: "The Commission is encouraging the development of better age-verification tools and online content filters." As shown by numerous examples in the past, the instrumentalisation of this kind of legitimate pledge often hides the worst anti-democratic measures. Content filtering has already proven ineffective to tackle issues that the Commission says it needs to deal with: the only effective way is to remove content directly from the source, that is to say on the server where they are hosted, and to arrest individuals benefiting from these illegal contents. Once established, censorship through filtering could easily be extended to other categories of content, for example in the interest of entertainment lobbies. International mechanisms already exist to fight money laundering, and must be used and strenghtened. Filtering of Internet content must be banned for the future, and repealed where it already exist, such as in France. “Once again, the European Commission is trying to implement dangerous filtering measures through proposals that appear legitimate and respectable. But other measures would be much more effective and less problematic in a freedom of expression perspective. Access to the Internet is now essential to participate in public debate and for access to knowledge. Under no pretext must we allow Internet censorship to develop, or else we will profoundly undermine the most fundamental values of our democracy.” declared Jérémie Zimmermann, co-founder and spokesperson of the citizen organisation La Quadrature du Net. * References * 1. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1135_en.htm ** About la Quadrature du Net ** La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that defends the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge. In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the digital age. La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and Privacy International. List of supporting organisations: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-la-quadrature-du-net ** Press contact and press room ** Jérémie Zimmermann, jz at laquadrature.net, +33 (0)615 940 675 http://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Oct 25 10:07:11 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:37:11 +0530 Subject: [governance] Commission's Plan for Online Gambling: Risk of Anti-Democratic Censorship, Again Message-ID: I am sorry, but is it possible to raise cogent arguments that dont make extensive use of the slippery slope argument? It would lead to a slightly more reasoned discourse. You might also read 'fatal system error' by Joseph Menn, then with the financial times. The first part is a fascinating look at Costa Rica based online gambling operations. --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Riaz K Tayob" To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Subject: [governance] Commission's Plan for Online Gambling: Risk of Anti-Democratic Censorship, Again Date: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 6:41 PM Themes: NET FILTERING, UE COMMISSION, CENSORSHIP, ONLINE GAMBLING La Quadrature du Net – For immediate release Permanent link: http://www.laquadrature.net/en/commissions-plan-for-online-gambling-risk-of-anti-democratic-censorship-again Commission's Plan for Online Gambling: Risk of Anti-Democratic Censorship, Again *** Paris, 24 October 2012 – While the European Commission sets out an action plan for online gambling [1], La Quadrature du Net warns about the risk of Internet content censorship, and urges Member States's governments to refuse the instrumentalisation of child protection for unacceptable measures. *** In the name of child protection and of the fight against money laundering and fraud, the European Commission is once again encouraging the development of online content filters: "The Commission is encouraging the development of better age-verification tools and online content filters." As shown by numerous examples in the past, the instrumentalisation of this kind of legitimate pledge often hides the worst anti-democratic measures. Content filtering has already proven ineffective to tackle issues that the Commission says it needs to deal with: the only effective way is to remove content directly from the source, that is to say on the server where they are hosted, and to arrest individuals benefiting from these illegal contents. Once established, censorship through filtering could easily be extended to other categories of content, for example in the interest of entertainment lobbies. International mechanisms already exist to fight money laundering, and must be used and strenghtened. Filtering of Internet content must be banned for the future, and repealed where it already exist, such as in France. “Once again, the European Commission is trying to implement dangerous filtering measures through proposals that appear legitimate and respectable. But other measures would be much more effective and less problematic in a freedom of expression perspective. Access to the Internet is now essential to participate in public debate and for access to knowledge. Under no pretext must we allow Internet censorship to develop, or else we will profoundly undermine the most fundamental values of our democracy.” declared Jérémie Zimmermann, co-founder and spokesperson of the citizen organisation La Quadrature du Net. * References * 1. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-1135_en.htm ** About la Quadrature du Net ** La Quadrature du Net is an advocacy group that defends the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet. More specifically, it advocates for the adaptation of French and European legislations to respect the founding principles of the Internet, most notably the free circulation of knowledge. In addition to its advocacy work, the group also aims to foster a better understanding of legislative processes among citizens. Through specific and pertinent information and tools, La Quadrature du Net hopes to encourage citizens' participation in the public debate on rights and freedoms in the digital age. La Quadrature du Net is supported by French, European and international NGOs including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Open Society Institute and Privacy International. List of supporting organisations: https://www.laquadrature.net/en/they-support-la-quadrature-du-net ** Press contact and press room ** Jérémie Zimmermann, jz at laquadrature.net, +33 (0)615 940 675 http://www.laquadrature.net/en/press-room -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 12:04:16 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:04:16 -0400 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: <50867242.5040403@itforchange.net> References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> <50867242.5040403@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hi, On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:32 AM, parminder wrote: > > On Monday 22 October 2012 11:32 PM, McTim wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:22 AM, parminder > wrote: > > snip > > > >> >> I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on >> requester pays. > > > > This would be very surprising indeed. Do you have a link? > > > McTim > > Here is the link. http://www.nixi.in/en/routing-and-tarrif-policy Is it mandatory for all ISPs in the country to connect to NIXI? It is a highly unusual model for IXPs in that it mandates "forced regional peering" AND acts as a settlement house. What "requester pays" means in this case is that " "requested" traffic from ISP A to ISP B is measured and subtract the "requested" traffic from ISP B to ISP A." In other words in the case of asymmetric traffic flows, one provider pays another. This is not unusual, but what is unusual is that such asymmetries are normally monitored by each party and if it continues for months on end, then either depeering occurs or one network will ask for the other to pay them (paid peering or transit). In any case, the NIXI model would make it trivial for one ISP (or a cyber criminal) to create such an assymetry. I wrote about such a scenario in the context of "sending party network pays" http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121021_the_etno_proposal_unintended_consequences/ I don't see how this is any different in potential outcome. Best to let bodies make agreements amongst themselves. That's what has worked remarkably well so far. -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 12:12:17 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:12:17 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Parminder, On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder wrote: > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > Internet policy making. My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, rather an effort to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). It's clear we see the world differently. -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From apisan at unam.mx Thu Oct 25 12:23:47 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:23:47 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net>, Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F0DD8F@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Tim, Parminder, 1 +1 on Tim's point. 2. Not rabid. Point that finger somewhere else. 3. The opposition you find for CIRP is NOT against democratizing anything. It is against the proposal from people who think it does the opposite. 4. Re finding any pleasure in the article that puts a spotlight on IT4Change, not. Nor your reply. Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de McTim [dogwallah at gmail.com] Enviado el: jueves, 25 de octubre de 2012 11:12 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy Parminder, On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder wrote: > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > Internet policy making. My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, rather an effort to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). It's clear we see the world differently. -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 12:23:32 2012 From: ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com (Narine Khachatryan) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:23:32 +0500 Subject: [governance] OFCOM: Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes Report In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Sala, Thank you very much for the report. Regards, Narine On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 3:31 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear All, > > OFCOM just released this Report today and I thought that you might find it > interesting: > > > http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/research/media-literacy/oct2012/main.pdf > > Kind Regards, > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- www.safe.am www.immasin.am www.mediaeducation.am Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 12:39:17 2012 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 19:39:17 +0300 Subject: [governance] The "ICANN Africa Strategy" Is Not the Same as the 'African Agenda' Message-ID: The "ICANN Africa Strategy" Is Not the Same as the 'African Agenda' http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121024_icann_africa_strategy_is_not_the_same_as_the_african_agenda/ Gideon Rop DotConnectAfrica -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 12:41:05 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 12:41:05 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F0DD8F@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F0DD8F@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan at unam.mx> wrote: > 3. The opposition you find for CIRP is NOT against democratizing anything. > It is against the proposal from people who think it does the opposite. > Virtually nobody is expressly against democratization because it is political suicide, and many who are uncomfortable with democratization nevertheless claim its mantle, in addition to those truly for democratization. As a consequence, one always has to think for themselves and not rely on labels and conclusory statements about whether a proposal furthers the cause of democracy or not. In the process of "thinking for one's self" it doesn't mean that everybody's opinion is necessarily equally valid because there are definitions, tests and standards that can be applied, like asking whether or not the proposal allows those who would be governed to vote on who their governors will be, or not. There are others. Paul R. Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 13:08:00 2012 From: ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com (Narine Khachatryan) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:08:00 +0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear all, I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!) In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot visit Azerbaijan. I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. Regards, Narine On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > Hi Jeremy and al, > I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not > be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested > to register. > > If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, > I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in > the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. > > While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room > purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it > becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important > acknowledgement of our presence. > > I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated > as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much > as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, > and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote > Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote > participants as equal members of a meeting. > > I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) > > With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's > input, > > Ginger > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > ** > ** > > > > On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: > >> Hi Jeremy >> >> Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a >> bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each >> other? Even just links to home pages would help... >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> >> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered >> participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at >> Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at >> http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >> >> Andrew Puddephatt >> Anja Kovacs >> Anriette Esterhuysen >> Antonio Medina Gomez >> Arthit Suriyawongkul >> Avri Doria >> Brett Solomon >> Claudio Ruiz >> Deborah Brown >> Dixie Hawtin >> Elonnai Hickok >> Emma Llanso >> Gene Kimmelman >> Iarla Flynn >> Imran Ahmed Shah >> Jeremy Malcolm >> Jochai Ben-Avie >> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >> Joy Liddicoat >> Katitza Rodriguez >> Kevin Bankston >> Matthew Shears >> Michael Gurstein >> Norbert Bollow >> Parminder Jeet Singh >> Pranesh Prakash >> Premila Kumar >> Raquel Gatto >> Rashmi Rangnath >> Shita Laksmi >> Tapani Tarvainen >> Theresa Züger >> Valeria Betancourt >> William Drake >> * * >> -- >> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >> >> >> > -- www.safe.am www.immasin.am www.mediaeducation.am Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gideonrop at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 13:13:15 2012 From: gideonrop at gmail.com (Gideon) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:13:15 +0300 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: <5087b085.BXMq7lGN0DRLLxC5%suresh@hserus.net> References: <5087b085.BXMq7lGN0DRLLxC5%suresh@hserus.net> Message-ID: Dear Suresh Ramasubramanian, Of course, the sentiments that you have conveyed in your posting below shows that you remain disrespectful of DCA. This is quite unfair and absolutely unjustified on your part. You have not given yourself the chance to really understand DCA's side of the story. I recall DCA and others arguing endlessly with you on CircleID in the comments section of the Blog posting (Re: * http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_africa_ready_for_a_dotafrica_gtld_future/)* that was posted by me at the time, when I was just a fan of DCA. First, you claim that DCA shot itself in the foot by bidding for the wrong TLD. Nothing could be farther from the truth. You are probably not aware that ICANN already approved DCA's Change Request regarding the gTLD string name applied-for. Therefore, ICANN now officially recognizes DCA Trust as an applicant for the .Africa string name, so DCA has not applied for the wrong TLD as you have erroneously stated in your posting. Second, if you claim that this issue will have to be seen "from the prism of dueling commercial interests", then it would be good for everyone to patiently wait for the Initial and Final Evaluation results of the applications to be announced by ICANN. On what basis would you now be favouring one commercial interest over another? Is it fair or legitimate for a "commercial interest" to claim that it has the endorsement of the African Union Commission to apply on behalf of the African Community, but then submits an application to ICANN that does not even acknowledge this same Community that it claims to support it? Perhaps it would be necessary for you to look through your prism again. Third, you blame DCA for launching extremely vitriolic campaign against anybody at all they saw as opposed to their interests. Please note that DCA has fully explained why it had to engage on the 'No Campaigns', and that is now in the past. Everyone has already moved on. Finally, stating that one has lost is similar to the misleading notions contained in the Domainincite article that you have referred to. I would also like to refer you to DCA's official response to the writer of that Domainincite blog. * http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1110608545772.html *, or perhaps what other bloggers also think of his opinion, you so value * http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/ * Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and calling the results of the application prematurely based on the fact that you do not like DCA is quite subjective. You may recall that at the time you claimed that DCA did not impress you, UniForum had not even shown any interest to apply for .Africa at that time. Therefore, your really have no justification for being against DotConnectAfrica Trust. Finally, you may not want to miss this latest clarification on circleid, to sort out the same confusion you and the author DCA is replying to, on the declaration of Victory, that seem to be limited by Prism sphere. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121024_icann_africa_strategy_is_not_the_same_as_the_african_agenda/ Thanks. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Replying to an email of Riaz Tayob's - posted in the archives - > > As far as I can see dotconnectafrica shot themselves in their own foot by > first > bidding for the wrong TLD, and then launching an extremely vitriolic attack > campaign against anybody at all they saw as opposed to their interests. > > This on circleid for example was the first I heard of this group and their > campaign, and it failed to impress me right at the start. > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_africa_ready_for_a_dotafrica_gtld_future/ > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121008_icann_africa_strategy_a_new_approach_to_africa/ > > Anything at all more on this issue will have to be seen from the prism of > dueling commercial interests, one of which has apparently lost out but is > still > aggressively claiming victory. > > This article says it all - > http://domainincite.com/9802-dotconnectafrica-disconnected-from-reality > > thanks > --srs > > On 2012/10/12 04:11 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: > > > the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of the > > extortion screw", > > Whatever does this mean? > > > ______________________________ ______________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Thu Oct 25 13:17:37 2012 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:17:37 +0000 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B167653@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> +3 ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:08 PM To: Ginger Paque; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Jeremy Malcolm Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list Dear all, I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!) In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot visit Azerbaijan. I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. Regards, Narine On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque > wrote: Hi Jeremy and al, I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested to register. If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important acknowledgement of our presence. I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote participants as equal members of a meeting. I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's input, Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake > wrote: Hi Jeremy Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each other? Even just links to home pages would help... Bill On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: A couple of people have requested the final list of registered participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! Andrew Puddephatt Anja Kovacs Anriette Esterhuysen Antonio Medina Gomez Arthit Suriyawongkul Avri Doria Brett Solomon Claudio Ruiz Deborah Brown Dixie Hawtin Elonnai Hickok Emma Llanso Gene Kimmelman Iarla Flynn Imran Ahmed Shah Jeremy Malcolm Jochai Ben-Avie Joonas Mikael Mäkinen Joy Liddicoat Katitza Rodriguez Kevin Bankston Matthew Shears Michael Gurstein Norbert Bollow Parminder Jeet Singh Pranesh Prakash Premila Kumar Raquel Gatto Rashmi Rangnath Shita Laksmi Tapani Tarvainen Theresa Züger Valeria Betancourt William Drake -- Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' -- www.safe.am www.immasin.am www.mediaeducation.am Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Thu Oct 25 13:27:02 2012 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:27:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B167653@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: , <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B167653@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <1351186022.44735.YahooMailNeo@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> +4   The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Lee W McKnight To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Narine Khachatryan ; Ginger Paque ; "bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org" Cc: Jeremy Malcolm Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:17 AM Subject: RE: [governance] Re: Final registration list +3 ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:08 PM To: Ginger Paque; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Jeremy Malcolm Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list Dear all, I absolutely agree with what Ginger says.  Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!)  In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy  -  they all cannot visit Azerbaijan.  I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. Regards, Narine     On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: Hi Jeremy and al, >I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested to register. > >If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. > >While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it becomes even more valuable to remote participants.  This is an important acknowledgement of our presence. > >I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote participants as equal members of a meeting. > >I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) > >With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's input, > >Ginger >Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > >VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >Diplo Foundation >Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >www.diplomacy.edu/ig > > > > > > > >On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: > >Hi Jeremy >> >> >>Good to see this is moving along.  Is there any chance we could attach a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each other?  Even just links to home pages would help... >> >> >> >>Bill >> >> >>On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> >>A couple of people have requested the final list of registered participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/.  Thanks! >>> >>>Andrew Puddephatt >>>Anja Kovacs >>>Anriette Esterhuysen >>>Antonio Medina Gomez >>>Arthit Suriyawongkul >>>Avri Doria >>>Brett Solomon >>>Claudio Ruiz >>>Deborah Brown >>>Dixie Hawtin >>>Elonnai Hickok >>>Emma Llanso >>>Gene Kimmelman >>>Iarla Flynn >>>Imran Ahmed Shah >>>Jeremy Malcolm >>>Jochai Ben-Avie >>>Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>>Joy Liddicoat >>>Katitza Rodriguez >>>Kevin Bankston >>>Matthew Shears >>>Michael Gurstein >>>Norbert Bollow >>>Parminder Jeet Singh >>>Pranesh Prakash >>>Premila Kumar >>>Raquel Gatto >>>Rashmi Rangnath >>>Shita Laksmi >>>Tapani Tarvainen >>>Theresa Züger >>>Valeria Betancourt >>>William Drake >>>   >>>--  >>>Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek  >>>host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >> > -- www.safe.am www.immasin.am www.mediaeducation.am Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From ias_pk at yahoo.com Thu Oct 25 13:35:40 2012 From: ias_pk at yahoo.com (Imran Ahmed Shah) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:35:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list Message-ID: <1351186540.29574.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web125101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear Jeremy, I also fully support Ginger's points and RP. Please count me in the list of RP not in the list of those who will be present in the meeting room. Regards Imran Ahmed Shah ------------------------------ On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 10:17 PM PKT Lee W McKnight wrote: >+3 >________________________________ >From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] >Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:08 PM >To: Ginger Paque; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org; governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Cc: Jeremy Malcolm >Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list > >Dear all, > >I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. > >Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? > >1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!) > >In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot visit Azerbaijan. > >I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? > >Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. > >Regards, Narine > > > > >On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: >Hi Jeremy and al, >I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested to register. > >If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. > >While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important acknowledgement of our presence. > >I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote participants as equal members of a meeting. > >I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) > >With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's input, > >Ginger >Ginger (Virginia) Paque > >VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >Diplo Foundation >Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >www.diplomacy.edu/ig > > > > >On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: >Hi Jeremy > >Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each other? Even just links to home pages would help... > >Bill > >On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >A couple of people have requested the final list of registered participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! > >Andrew Puddephatt >Anja Kovacs >Anriette Esterhuysen >Antonio Medina Gomez >Arthit Suriyawongkul >Avri Doria >Brett Solomon >Claudio Ruiz >Deborah Brown >Dixie Hawtin >Elonnai Hickok >Emma Llanso >Gene Kimmelman >Iarla Flynn >Imran Ahmed Shah >Jeremy Malcolm >Jochai Ben-Avie >Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >Joy Liddicoat >Katitza Rodriguez >Kevin Bankston >Matthew Shears >Michael Gurstein >Norbert Bollow >Parminder Jeet Singh >Pranesh Prakash >Premila Kumar >Raquel Gatto >Rashmi Rangnath >Shita Laksmi >Tapani Tarvainen >Theresa Züger >Valeria Betancourt >William Drake > >-- >Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > > > > > >-- >www.safe.am >www.immasin.am >www.mediaeducation.am > >Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan > -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 13:45:37 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:15:37 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: <1351186022.44735.YahooMailNeo@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B167653@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> <1351186022.44735.YahooMailNeo@web160503.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: +5 On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:57 PM, shaila mistry wrote: > +4 > > *The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !* > *..................... the renaissance of composure ! > * > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Lee W McKnight > *To:* "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; > Narine Khachatryan ; Ginger Paque < > gpaque at gmail.com>; "bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org" < > bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org> > *Cc:* Jeremy Malcolm > *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:17 AM > *Subject:* RE: [governance] Re: Final registration list > > +3 > ------------------------------ > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ > ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:08 PM > *To:* Ginger Paque; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org; > governance at lists.igcaucus.org > *Cc:* Jeremy Malcolm > *Subject:* [governance] Re: Final registration list > > Dear all, > > I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. > > Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? > > 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able > to travel. (!) > > In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some > citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another > email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot > visit Azerbaijan. > > I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? > > Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the > event including remote participants. > > Regards, Narine > > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > > Hi Jeremy and al, > I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not > be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested > to register. > > If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, > I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in > the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. > > While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room > purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it > becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important > acknowledgement of our presence. > > I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated > as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much > as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, > and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote > Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote > participants as equal members of a meeting. > > I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) > > With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's > input, > > Ginger > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > ** > ** > > > > On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: > > Hi Jeremy > > Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a > bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each > other? Even just links to home pages would help... > > Bill > > On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > > A couple of people have requested the final list of registered > participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at > Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at > http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! > > Andrew Puddephatt > Anja Kovacs > Anriette Esterhuysen > Antonio Medina Gomez > Arthit Suriyawongkul > Avri Doria > Brett Solomon > Claudio Ruiz > Deborah Brown > Dixie Hawtin > Elonnai Hickok > Emma Llanso > Gene Kimmelman > Iarla Flynn > Imran Ahmed Shah > Jeremy Malcolm > Jochai Ben-Avie > Joonas Mikael Mäkinen > Joy Liddicoat > Katitza Rodriguez > Kevin Bankston > Matthew Shears > Michael Gurstein > Norbert Bollow > Parminder Jeet Singh > Pranesh Prakash > Premila Kumar > Raquel Gatto > Rashmi Rangnath > Shita Laksmi > Tapani Tarvainen > Theresa Züger > Valeria Betancourt > William Drake > * * > -- > Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com > Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek > host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > > > > > > > -- > www.safe.am > www.immasin.am > www.mediaeducation.am > > Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Thu Oct 25 13:51:34 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 17:51:34 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F0DD8F@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local>, Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F10E7A@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Paul, the last sentence in your email is hardly controvertible as theory, again. I think that "many who are uncomfortable with democratization nevertheless claim its mantle" is an interesting statement. If you mean anyone in particular it may be better to know. As you know, often in debates about democracy, such a statement is cast and each side may claim it applies to the other one. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: Paul Lehto [lehto.paul at gmail.com] Enviado el: jueves, 25 de octubre de 2012 11:41 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch CC: McTim; parminder Asunto: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch > wrote: 3. The opposition you find for CIRP is NOT against democratizing anything. It is against the proposal from people who think it does the opposite. Virtually nobody is expressly against democratization because it is political suicide, and many who are uncomfortable with democratization nevertheless claim its mantle, in addition to those truly for democratization. As a consequence, one always has to think for themselves and not rely on labels and conclusory statements about whether a proposal furthers the cause of democracy or not. In the process of "thinking for one's self" it doesn't mean that everybody's opinion is necessarily equally valid because there are definitions, tests and standards that can be applied, like asking whether or not the proposal allows those who would be governed to vote on who their governors will be, or not. There are others. Paul R. Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Thu Oct 25 13:55:39 2012 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 10:55:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list References: , <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B167653@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <1351187739.60449.YahooMailNeo@web160505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Hi Everyone I considered registering any way even though I was not planning to travel to Baku, for the same reasons many of us are not attending. But held back because of the requirement to provide sensitive passport information.I agree that there should be registration inclusion of remote participants , of course without having to provide sensitive personal information.This way we open up the participation to a more representative demography?? Cheers  Shaila    The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Lee W McKnight To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; Narine Khachatryan ; Ginger Paque ; "bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org" Cc: Jeremy Malcolm Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:17 AM Subject: RE: [governance] Re: Final registration list +3 ________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 1:08 PM To: Ginger Paque; bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Cc: Jeremy Malcolm Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list Dear all, I absolutely agree with what Ginger says.  Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!)  In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy  -  they all cannot visit Azerbaijan.  I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. Regards, Narine     On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: Hi Jeremy and al, >I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested to register. > >If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. > >While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it becomes even more valuable to remote participants.  This is an important acknowledgement of our presence. > >I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote participants as equal members of a meeting. > >I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) > >With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's input, > >Ginger >Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > >VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >Diplo Foundation >Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >www.diplomacy.edu/ig > > > > > > > >On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: > >Hi Jeremy >> >> >>Good to see this is moving along.  Is there any chance we could attach a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each other?  Even just links to home pages would help... >> >> >> >>Bill >> >> >>On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >> >>A couple of people have requested the final list of registered participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/.  Thanks! >>> >>>Andrew Puddephatt >>>Anja Kovacs >>>Anriette Esterhuysen >>>Antonio Medina Gomez >>>Arthit Suriyawongkul >>>Avri Doria >>>Brett Solomon >>>Claudio Ruiz >>>Deborah Brown >>>Dixie Hawtin >>>Elonnai Hickok >>>Emma Llanso >>>Gene Kimmelman >>>Iarla Flynn >>>Imran Ahmed Shah >>>Jeremy Malcolm >>>Jochai Ben-Avie >>>Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>>Joy Liddicoat >>>Katitza Rodriguez >>>Kevin Bankston >>>Matthew Shears >>>Michael Gurstein >>>Norbert Bollow >>>Parminder Jeet Singh >>>Pranesh Prakash >>>Premila Kumar >>>Raquel Gatto >>>Rashmi Rangnath >>>Shita Laksmi >>>Tapani Tarvainen >>>Theresa Züger >>>Valeria Betancourt >>>William Drake >>>   >>>--  >>>Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek  >>>host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >> > -- www.safe.am www.immasin.am www.mediaeducation.am Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list:     governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit:     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see:     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:     http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- ____________________________________________________________ You received this message as a subscriber on the list: governance at lists.igcaucus.org To be removed from the list, visit: http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing For all other list information and functions, see: http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see: http://www.igcaucus.org/ Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t From suresh at hserus.net Thu Oct 25 13:58:05 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:28:05 +0530 Subject: [governance] Africa to launch own Internet exchange point In-Reply-To: References: <507FCDFD.4050400@gmail.com> <67A5871E-6688-4D3A-8483-F81EFE40F69A@virtualized.org> <50802BD9.3080309@gmx.net> <46EE7EF9-3090-49DC-90F7-E85F71D83099@virtualized.org> <1005814475.6869.1350632196387.JavaMail.www@wwinf1g20> <013d01cdadfa$bc37dfa0$34a79ee0$@isoc.org> <50828C7A.9050407@itforchange.net> <80433240-1350735178-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-460218140-@b26.c13.bise6.blackberry> <5084F41F.702@itforchange.net> <50867242.5040403@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Without going into specifics consider some explanations. No names named and this is not specifically in the nixi context Forced peering because at least some telcos that control international bandwidth may not be willing to let local ISPs peer and use cheaper local connectivity, instead forcing them to route their packets out through an international gateway and bill far higher The usual "why should I peer with you when I believe you should buy transit from me?" Magnified, lots. Settlement for much the same reason. --srs (iPad) On 25-Oct-2012, at 21:34, McTim wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 6:32 AM, parminder wrote: >> >> On Monday 22 October 2012 11:32 PM, McTim wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:22 AM, parminder >> wrote: >> >> snip >> >> >> >>> >>> I read that NIXI in India has some settlement arrangement based on >>> requester pays. >> >> >> >> This would be very surprising indeed. Do you have a link? >> >> >> McTim >> >> Here is the link. http://www.nixi.in/en/routing-and-tarrif-policy > > > Is it mandatory for all ISPs in the country to connect to NIXI? > > It is a highly unusual model for IXPs in that it mandates "forced > regional peering" AND acts as a settlement house. > > What "requester pays" means in this case is that " "requested" traffic > from ISP A to ISP B is measured and subtract the "requested" traffic > from ISP B to ISP A." > > In other words in the case of asymmetric traffic flows, one provider > pays another. This is not unusual, but what is unusual is that such > asymmetries are normally monitored by each party and if it continues > for months on end, then either depeering occurs or one network will > ask for the other to pay them (paid peering or transit). > > In any case, the NIXI model would make it trivial for one ISP (or a > cyber criminal) to create such an assymetry. > > I wrote about such a scenario in the context of "sending party network pays" > > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121021_the_etno_proposal_unintended_consequences/ > > I don't see how this is any different in potential outcome. > > Best to let bodies make agreements amongst themselves. That's what > has worked remarkably well so far. > > > -- > 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Oct 25 14:05:14 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:35:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] Interesting story of the never ending ICANN Conflict of Interest. This time on .africa? In-Reply-To: References: <5087b085.BXMq7lGN0DRLLxC5%suresh@hserus.net> Message-ID: <03DFF127-8C92-4809-9C92-C5A30AB8B6C4@hserus.net> Sigh. OK, let us wait for who finally gets .africa Meanwhile, in that circleid post, "so called", "chicanery" ... The usual tirade I see. --srs (iPad) On 25-Oct-2012, at 22:43, Gideon wrote: > Dear Suresh Ramasubramanian, > > Of course, the sentiments that you have conveyed in your posting below shows that you remain disrespectful of DCA. This is quite unfair and absolutely unjustified on your part. You have not given yourself the chance to really understand DCA's side of the story. I recall DCA and others arguing endlessly with you on CircleID in the comments section of the Blog posting (Re: http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_africa_ready_for_a_dotafrica_gtld_future/) that was posted by me at the time, when I was just a fan of DCA. > > First, you claim that DCA shot itself in the foot by bidding for the wrong TLD. Nothing could be farther from the truth. You are probably not aware that ICANN already approved DCA's Change Request regarding the gTLD string name applied-for. Therefore, ICANN now officially recognizes DCA Trust as an applicant for the .Africa string name, so DCA has not applied for the wrong TLD as you have erroneously stated in your posting. > > Second, if you claim that this issue will have to be seen "from the prism of dueling commercial interests", then it would be good for everyone to patiently wait for the Initial and Final Evaluation results of the applications to be announced by ICANN. On what basis would you now be favouring one commercial interest over another? Is it fair or legitimate for a "commercial interest" to claim that it has the endorsement of the African Union Commission to apply on behalf of the African Community, but then submits an application to ICANN that does not even acknowledge this same Community that it claims to support it? Perhaps it would be necessary for you to look through your prism again. > > Third, you blame DCA for launching extremely vitriolic campaign against anybody at all they saw as opposed to their interests. Please note that DCA has fully explained why it had to engage on the 'No Campaigns', and that is now in the past. Everyone has already moved on. > > Finally, stating that one has lost is similar to the misleading notions contained in the Domainincite article that you have referred to. I would also like to refer you to DCA's official response to the writer of that Domainincite blog. http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs053/1102516344150/archive/1110608545772.html, or perhaps what other bloggers also think of his opinion, you so value http://domainingafrica.com/i-will-win-africa-because-i-have-friends-in-high-places-case-of-conflicted-board-members/ Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and calling the results of the application prematurely based on the fact that you do not like DCA is quite subjective. > > You may recall that at the time you claimed that DCA did not impress you, UniForum had not even shown any interest to apply for .Africa at that time. Therefore, your really have no justification for being against DotConnectAfrica Trust. > > Finally, you may not want to miss this latest clarification on circleid, to sort out the same confusion you and the author DCA is replying to, on the declaration of Victory, that seem to be limited by Prism sphere. http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121024_icann_africa_strategy_is_not_the_same_as_the_african_agenda/ > > Thanks. > > > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: >> Replying to an email of Riaz Tayob's - posted in the archives - >> >> As far as I can see dotconnectafrica shot themselves in their own foot by first >> bidding for the wrong TLD, and then launching an extremely vitriolic attack >> campaign against anybody at all they saw as opposed to their interests. >> >> This on circleid for example was the first I heard of this group and their >> campaign, and it failed to impress me right at the start. >> >> http://www.circleid.com/posts/is_africa_ready_for_a_dotafrica_gtld_future/ >> http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121008_icann_africa_strategy_a_new_approach_to_africa/ >> >> Anything at all more on this issue will have to be seen from the prism of >> dueling commercial interests, one of which has apparently lost out but is still >> aggressively claiming victory. >> >> This article says it all - >> http://domainincite.com/9802-dotconnectafrica-disconnected-from-reality >> >> thanks >> --srs >> >> On 2012/10/12 04:11 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote: >> >> > the claims are vague enough to be consistent with "one more turn of the >> > extortion screw", >> >> Whatever does this mean? >> >> >> ______________________________ ______________________________ >> 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: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Thu Oct 25 16:17:42 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 20:17:42 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> While it is obvious that the Daily Mail article was _not_ an impartial and sober assessment of the situation, it does seem to unearth background documents indicating that the CIRP proposal came from IT4Change, i.e., from Parminder, not from a groundswell of support from "the global South." And it calls into question the degree to which the Rio conference agreed on the proposal, indicating instead that Parminder found it easier to gain the assent of a few governmental officials behind the scenes, than to get broad, democratic support from civil society, the IGF, or other stakeholders. It is also interesting how quickly Indian ministers, not to mention Brazil and So. Africa., backed down when the proposal was challenged. Since it wasn't their idea, they were unable to defend it. A lot of things can be attributed to the power of industry and the U.S., but the lack of support for CIRP is not one of them. There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in Internet governance. My understanding from various civil society organizations I have met from India is that the CIRP proposal was not popular there, either. It is all in keeping with my general take on Parminder's ideas, which seek to replay 1970s-era battles between U.S. hegemony and third world sovereignty, with sovereign nation-states being confused with "democracy," at a time when sovereignty is either irrelevant to, or a regressive overlay on, global Internet governance. As for the assertion that the CIRP proposal had nothing to do with ICANN, it is all on record, it called for domain name registration taxes to fund the thing and contained a statement that it would "coordinate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting." An accurate description and analysis of the CIRP proposal can be found here. http://www.internetgovernance.org/2011/10/29/a-united-nations-committee-for-internet-related-policies-a-fair-assessment/ Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder > Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > Internet Economy > > Parminder, > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > wrote: > > > > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > > Internet policy making. > > My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, > rather an effort > to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). > > It's clear we see the world differently. > > -- > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From gate.one205 at yahoo.fr Thu Oct 25 16:24:48 2012 From: gate.one205 at yahoo.fr (Jean-Yves GATETE) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:24:48 +0100 (BST) Subject: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9f=2E=3A_Re=3A_=5Bgovernance=5D?= Re: Final registration list Message-ID: <1351196688.59470.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web28905.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> +6 Jean-Yves G ------------------------------ Le jeu. 25 oct. 2012 19:45 HAEC, Chaitanya Dhareshwar a écrit : >+5 > >On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:57 PM, shaila mistry wrote: > >> +4 >> >> *The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !* >> *..................... the renaissance of composure ! >> * >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* Lee W McKnight >> *To:* "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; >> Narine Khachatryan ; Ginger Paque < >> gpaque at gmail.com>; "bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org" < >> bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org> >> *Cc:* Jeremy Malcolm >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:17 AM >> *Subject:* RE: [governance] Re: Final registration list >> >> +3 >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ >> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ >> ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 1: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 16:27:31 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:27:31 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F10E7A@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F0DD8F@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F10E7A@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan at unam.mx> wrote: > I think that "many who are uncomfortable with democratization > nevertheless claim its mantle" is an interesting statement. If you mean > anyone in particular it may be better to know. As you know, often in > debates about democracy, such a statement is cast and each side may claim > it applies to the other one. > When numerous sides to the same debate, and even countries and former countries like the The *German Democratic Republic* (*Deutsche Demokratische Republik)* all claim the mantle of democracy, I think the vast majority of people can agree at least in principle that some who are not democratic nevertheless claim its mantle. (By falsely claiming "the mantle" I mean that the substance of what they support, if enacted, would not be democracy or pro-democracy.) Most recently, if the claim were made that MS governance is an example of the flowering of real democracy, I would consider that a false claim to the mantle of democracy. (Nobody used those exact words and it is not my intention to name names even if I could think of some names to use.) I I would say that it is indeed controvertible that, around the world, various folks falsely claim the mantle of democracy, I would also stipulate that somewhere, perhaps even here, there will definitely be folks who disagree with my assessment in a particular case. Presently we don't have elections or trials or any other fora to resolve such "academic" disagreements no matter how important they may seem to be. Paul Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From nb at bollow.ch Thu Oct 25 16:41:01 2012 From: nb at bollow.ch (Norbert Bollow) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 22:41:01 +0200 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F10E7A@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F0DD8F@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F10E7A@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Message-ID: <20121025224101.616c05fb@quill.bollow.ch> Alejandro Pisanty Baruch wrote (in response to Paul Lehto): > I think that "many who are uncomfortable with democratization > nevertheless claim its mantle" is an interesting statement. If you > mean anyone in particular it may be better to know. As you know, > often in debates about democracy, such a statement is cast and each > side may claim it applies to the other one. I would suggest that it is best to avoid the temptation of naming names on this point. But I would, from my personal observation, definitely confirm Paul's statement that there is no shortage of people who use a pretense of being in favor of democracy while bullying and/or manipulating others into allowing them to push something through that is totally contrary to the spirit of democracy. In my view, the best strategy for being able to reliably detect such dishonesty is to deeply acquaint oneself with the various reasons that lead various people to genuinely care about democracy (or whatever else is the pretense du jour). Then you will be able to quickly recognize the wolves in sheep's clothing for what they are, and armed with this information, you can develop strategies for achieving the important goals while usually avoiding direct confrontations with the wolves. Greetings, Norbert -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 16:45:20 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:45:20 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > [snip] There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in > Internet governance. > With the caveat that it be appropriately drafted and designed, I would support greater UN involvement in Internet governance. In any case, at minimum, it would appear that greater involvement by this listserv in Internet governance might be fairly said to be greater UN involvement. Is this problematic -- is there "no popular support" for anything greater when it comes to the UN? "NO popular support" is a very strong statement, and as applied to "greater UN involvement" it is not true since at least one person expressing support would be more than "no" support, and I have done so above. It would be easy to expand the number of counterexamples. This statement of "no popular support" appears to be a specific example of at least exaggeration if not false claim regarding what amounts to the mantle of democracy, since democracy is supposed to be responsive to popular support and is somewhat interchangeable in this context. I would be happy to allow Mr. Mueller the latitude to make what amount in part to political arguments, but it seems that in the course of this email I refer to below, a stricter policy in terms of how one characterizes support or the lack thereof is being urged by Mr. Mueller, so I think it's only fair to hold him to about the same standard he urges for others. Paul Lehto, J.D. Milton L. Mueller > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies > Internet Governance Project > http://blog.internetgovernance.org > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder > > Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > > Internet Economy > > > > Parminder, > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > > > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > > > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > > > Internet policy making. > > > > My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, > > rather an effort > > to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). > > > > It's clear we see the world differently. > > > > -- > > 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.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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 17:11:33 2012 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 16:11:33 -0500 Subject: =?GB2312?B?UmU6IFKopmYuOiBSZTogW2dvdmVybmFuY2Vd?= Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: <1351196688.59470.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web28905.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> References: <1351196688.59470.BPMail_high_noncarrier@web28905.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <50C1D1F2-E061-49B0-BB0D-99D98D5302BB@gmail.com> +7 Carlos Vera Quintana 593 9 88141143 El 25/10/2012, a las 15:24, Jean-Yves GATETE escribió: > > +6 > Jean-Yves G > > > > ------------------------------ > Le jeu. 25 oct. 2012 19:45 HAEC, Chaitanya Dhareshwar a écrit : > >> +5 >> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 10:57 PM, shaila mistry wrote: >> >>> +4 >>> >>> *The journey begins sooner than you anticipate !* >>> *..................... the renaissance of composure ! >>> * >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* Lee W McKnight >>> *To:* "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" ; >>> Narine Khachatryan ; Ginger Paque < >>> gpaque at gmail.com>; "bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org" < >>> bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org> >>> *Cc:* Jeremy Malcolm >>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 10:17 AM >>> *Subject:* RE: [governance] Re: Final registration list >>> >>> +3 >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [ >>> governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Narine Khachatryan [ >>> ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com] >>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 1: > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From admin at alkasir.com Thu Oct 25 17:14:01 2012 From: admin at alkasir.com (Walid AL-SAQAF ) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 23:14:01 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: +8 I join my voice of support to Ginger on this and feel that remote participation must be a crucial component of every IGF event. I've used it effectively last time and would love to have it as an established practice. Sincerely, Walid ----------------- Walid Al-Saqaf Founder & Administrator alkasir for mapping and circumventing cyber censorship https://alkasir.com On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Narine Khachatryan < ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear all, > > I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. > > Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? > > 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able > to travel. (!) > > In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some > citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another > email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot > visit Azerbaijan. > > I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? > > Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the > event including remote participants. > > Regards, Narine > > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > >> Hi Jeremy and al, >> I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not >> be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested >> to register. >> >> If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, >> I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in >> the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. >> >> While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room >> purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it >> becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important >> acknowledgement of our presence. >> >> I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be >> treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, >> as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of >> the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote >> Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote >> participants as equal members of a meeting. >> >> I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) >> >> With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's >> input, >> >> Ginger >> Ginger (Virginia) Paque >> >> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >> Diplo Foundation >> Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >> www.diplomacy.edu/ig >> ** >> ** >> >> >> >> On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: >> >>> Hi Jeremy >>> >>> Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a >>> bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each >>> other? Even just links to home pages would help... >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>> >>> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered >>> participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at >>> Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at >>> http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >>> >>> Andrew Puddephatt >>> Anja Kovacs >>> Anriette Esterhuysen >>> Antonio Medina Gomez >>> Arthit Suriyawongkul >>> Avri Doria >>> Brett Solomon >>> Claudio Ruiz >>> Deborah Brown >>> Dixie Hawtin >>> Elonnai Hickok >>> Emma Llanso >>> Gene Kimmelman >>> Iarla Flynn >>> Imran Ahmed Shah >>> Jeremy Malcolm >>> Jochai Ben-Avie >>> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>> Joy Liddicoat >>> Katitza Rodriguez >>> Kevin Bankston >>> Matthew Shears >>> Michael Gurstein >>> Norbert Bollow >>> Parminder Jeet Singh >>> Pranesh Prakash >>> Premila Kumar >>> Raquel Gatto >>> Rashmi Rangnath >>> Shita Laksmi >>> Tapani Tarvainen >>> Theresa Züger >>> Valeria Betancourt >>> William Drake >>> * * >>> -- >>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > www.safe.am > www.immasin.am > www.mediaeducation.am > > Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Thu Oct 25 19:17:15 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 04:47:15 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: So, this is one of those times I do agree with milton's assessment. There is no global south groundswell here that I can see. And most civil society in India would rather not find themselves in a position where everything moved to the UN and decision making became a largely, or is it solely, intergovernmental process. --srs (iPad) On 26-Oct-2012, at 1:47, Milton L Mueller wrote: > While it is obvious that the Daily Mail article was _not_ an impartial and sober assessment of the situation, it does seem to unearth background documents indicating that the CIRP proposal came from IT4Change, i.e., from Parminder, not from a groundswell of support from "the global South." And it calls into question the degree to which the Rio conference agreed on the proposal, indicating instead that Parminder found it easier to gain the assent of a few governmental officials behind the scenes, than to get broad, democratic support from civil society, the IGF, or other stakeholders. > > It is also interesting how quickly Indian ministers, not to mention Brazil and So. Africa., backed down when the proposal was challenged. Since it wasn't their idea, they were unable to defend it. > > A lot of things can be attributed to the power of industry and the U.S., but the lack of support for CIRP is not one of them. There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in Internet governance. My understanding from various civil society organizations I have met from India is that the CIRP proposal was not popular there, either. It is all in keeping with my general take on Parminder's ideas, which seek to replay 1970s-era battles between U.S. hegemony and third world sovereignty, with sovereign nation-states being confused with "democracy," at a time when sovereignty is either irrelevant to, or a regressive overlay on, global Internet governance. > > As for the assertion that the CIRP proposal had nothing to do with ICANN, it is all on record, it called for domain name registration taxes to fund the thing and contained a statement that it would "coordinate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting." > > An accurate description and analysis of the CIRP proposal can be found here. http://www.internetgovernance.org/2011/10/29/a-united-nations-committee-for-internet-related-policies-a-fair-assessment/ > > Milton L. Mueller > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies > Internet Governance Project > http://blog.internetgovernance.org > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim >> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder >> Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the >> Internet Economy >> >> Parminder, >> >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the >>> active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy >>> principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global >>> Internet policy making. >> >> My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, >> rather an effort >> to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). >> >> It's clear we see the world differently. >> >> -- >> 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Thu Oct 25 21:10:19 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 21:10:19 -0400 Subject: [governance] Supporting something other than democracy because change is too hard. Message-ID: On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > And most civil society in India would rather not find themselves in a > position where everything moved to the UN and decision making became a > largely, or is it solely, intergovernmental process. > If it is a decision with global impacts, there's no legitmate way around having a global intergovernmental process (other than a global referendum, and how do we do that right now?) The problem, in a nutshell: If you really care about an issue and have tried to pursue democratic change, then you know: 1. To change one's small town or village politically is *relatively* easy (compared to what follows). 2. To change one's local state, province or territory is much harder, there are many more people to persuade and distance to overcome... 3. To change one's nation politically is harder yet: to do it alone often reminds one of Hercules. 4. To move more than one nation? Forbid the thought! This may require superhero status. :) 5. To move all the world's nations to action, via direct popular appeal or via a UN "intergovernmental process"? The difficulty nearly staggers the mind. In light of the difficulty of just changing one nation, former US President George W. Bush joked that things "would be so much easier if I were a dictator." Indeed, they would be. In light of the extreme difficulties of moving the entire world via the United Nations, one is highly tempted to favor lesser hurdles, like that of moving a smaller multi-stakeholder process provided one has good access to it or a vote on it. The desire to support multi-stakeholder process, all too often motivated by revulsion for the task of moving the world's governments, is quite understandable, but it is at the same time of the same general species as wishing one were a dictator so as to avoid the great difficulties of politics, especially democratic politics. These motivations implicate efficiency, often allege greater wisdom and expertise on the part of the dictatorship, aristocracy or oligarchy that is created. But they have those unavoidable democracy-deficits. People who legitimately care greatly about issues and are otherwise quite democratic-minded are sorely, sorely tempted to support processes that are something more "efficient" than democracy. But efficiency, expertise and manageable size do not create legitimacy in governance or the right to govern those left without even the pretense of a vote or say but who are nevertheless controlled by the decisions and rules made. Paul Lehto, J.D. > > --srs (iPad) > > On 26-Oct-2012, at 1:47, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > > While it is obvious that the Daily Mail article was _not_ an impartial > and sober assessment of the situation, it does seem to unearth background > documents indicating that the CIRP proposal came from IT4Change, i.e., from > Parminder, not from a groundswell of support from "the global South." And > it calls into question the degree to which the Rio conference agreed on the > proposal, indicating instead that Parminder found it easier to gain the > assent of a few governmental officials behind the scenes, than to get > broad, democratic support from civil society, the IGF, or other > stakeholders. > > > > It is also interesting how quickly Indian ministers, not to mention > Brazil and So. Africa., backed down when the proposal was challenged. Since > it wasn't their idea, they were unable to defend it. > > > > A lot of things can be attributed to the power of industry and the U.S., > but the lack of support for CIRP is not one of them. There just is no > popular support for greater UN involvement in Internet governance. My > understanding from various civil society organizations I have met from > India is that the CIRP proposal was not popular there, either. It is all > in keeping with my general take on Parminder's ideas, which seek to replay > 1970s-era battles between U.S. hegemony and third world sovereignty, with > sovereign nation-states being confused with "democracy," at a time when > sovereignty is either irrelevant to, or a regressive overlay on, global > Internet governance. > > > > As for the assertion that the CIRP proposal had nothing to do with > ICANN, it is all on record, it called for domain name registration taxes to > fund the thing and contained a statement that it would "coordinate and > oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of > the Internet, including global standards setting." > > > > An accurate description and analysis of the CIRP proposal can be found > here. > http://www.internetgovernance.org/2011/10/29/a-united-nations-committee-for-internet-related-policies-a-fair-assessment/ > > > > Milton L. Mueller > > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies > > Internet Governance Project > > http://blog.internetgovernance.org > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > >> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM > >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder > >> Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on > the > >> Internet Economy > >> > >> Parminder, > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > >>> active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > >>> principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > >>> Internet policy making. > >> > >> My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, > >> rather an effort > >> to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). > >> > >> It's clear we see the world differently. > >> > >> -- > >> 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.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 > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Thu Oct 25 21:32:13 2012 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:32:13 +0800 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Since being cross-posted to the governance list, this thread has lost a bit of context. So just to backtrack, Ginger was not talking about registration for the IGF, which I have nothing to do with. Actually as you may know, I've been probably the longest campaigner for improvement in support for online participation in the IGF,[0] including the ability for remote participants to register online.[1] So no argument there. She was talking about Best Bits, the civil society meeting planned for 3-4 November, for which I've been the lead organiser. In that case, remote participation was treated as integral from the start, and remote participants were invited at the outset to register themselves at the same time and in the same manner as everyone else.[2] However since then, we have moved to a different website and we required everyone who was attending in person to re-register, for purposes of arranging logistics on the ground.[3] Meanwhile I haven't yet provided a new mechanism for remote participants to register (or re-register), but am working on that this weekend. All the other facilities for remote participants are, however, already in place and have been for some time.[4] Hope that clarifies. [0] http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=1.0 dating way back to 2006 [1] See half-way down page 2 of http://igf.wgig.org/Contributions-Sept_2008/OCDC_Jeremy-Malcolm.pdf [2] See under "Participants" at http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/BestBits, and also http://bit.ly/SqnzeS [3] http://bestbits.igf-online.net [4] http://bestbits.igf-online.net/streaming/ On 26/10/2012, at 1:08 AM, Narine Khachatryan wrote: > Dear all, > > I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. > > Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? > > 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!) > > In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot visit Azerbaijan. > > I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? > > Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. > > Regards, Narine > > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > Hi Jeremy and al, > I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested to register. > > If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. > > While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important acknowledgement of our presence. > > I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote participants as equal members of a meeting. > > I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) > > With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's input, > > Ginger > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > > > > > On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: > Hi Jeremy > > Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each other? Even just links to home pages would help... > > Bill > > On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >> >> Andrew Puddephatt >> Anja Kovacs >> Anriette Esterhuysen >> Antonio Medina Gomez >> Arthit Suriyawongkul >> Avri Doria >> Brett Solomon >> Claudio Ruiz >> Deborah Brown >> Dixie Hawtin >> Elonnai Hickok >> Emma Llanso >> Gene Kimmelman >> Iarla Flynn >> Imran Ahmed Shah >> Jeremy Malcolm >> Jochai Ben-Avie >> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >> Joy Liddicoat >> Katitza Rodriguez >> Kevin Bankston >> Matthew Shears >> Michael Gurstein >> Norbert Bollow >> Parminder Jeet Singh >> Pranesh Prakash >> Premila Kumar >> Raquel Gatto >> Rashmi Rangnath >> Shita Laksmi >> Tapani Tarvainen >> Theresa Züger >> Valeria Betancourt >> William Drake >> >> -- >> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' > > > > > > -- > www.safe.am > www.immasin.am > www.mediaeducation.am > > Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers 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 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Thu Oct 25 21:58:58 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 18:58:58 -0700 Subject: [governance] Supporting something other than democracy because change is too hard. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1CC703A2-AC1A-4C79-AA2B-68BF4E28CF7D@virtualized.org> Paul, On Oct 25, 2012, at 6:10 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: > People who legitimately care greatly about issues and are otherwise quite democratic-minded are sorely, sorely tempted to support processes that are something more "efficient" than democracy. Actually, my impression is that given (as you have acknowledged) we don't actually have democracy in the context of defining global policies for something as vast, amorphous and ill-defined as the Internet, a preferable alternative to uni-stakeholderism of inter-governmental decree is multi-stakeholderism in which views beyond (but including) those of governments can be represented. As far as I can tell, the reason for a multi-stakeholder approach is the realization/acceptance that governments, be they democratically elected or not, do not (and perhaps cannot) represent the interests of all who make use of, provide, rely upon, seek to control, etc., the Internet. Ideally, it is a way in which people's, community's, and organization's interests can all be represented in an open forum in which a consensus (perhaps rough) can be reached. Contrary to your previous assertion that 'experts and informed voters do not become fully informed until "the last second"', my experience has been that participants in multi-stakeholder efforts do so because they have been deeply involved in the issues for a very long time and have a deep understanding as well as interest in ensuring their perspectives on the issues are understood (I'll note that I suspect this is probably in contrast to the vast majority of actual democratic voting where people's understanding of the issues and/or their representative's intent regarding those issues is ... limited). Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From nhklein at gmx.net Fri Oct 26 00:24:56 2012 From: nhklein at gmx.net (Norbert Klein) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 11:24:56 +0700 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> On 10/24/2012 9:12 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, > those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a > vote. > > In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much influence > that they even write the drafts of laws. But in multistakeholder > situations they take that scandal to a whole new level: those who > would be lobbyists in a democracy (corporations, experts, civil > society) become the legislators themselves, No. There is not only ONE stakeholder who becomes THE legislator - but there are MULTI stakeholders. In the absence and impossibility of taking universal votes on IG issues, I am not surprised about - and I share - the opinion of many that multi-stakeholder systems are the most practical ones that avoid that ONE stakeholder decides everything, and gives many opinions access to public discussion, even while decisions are organized not as a result of a vote in a multi-stakeholder forum. Norbert Klein Phnom Penh/Cambodia > and dispense with all public elections and not only write the laws but > pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up courts of > arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to go to > the court system set up by democracies. > > A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law > is just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. > Multistakeholderism is a coup d'etat against democracy by those who > would merely be lobbyists in a democratic system. So yes, I think it > is misleading at best to use the word "democratic" in reference to > multistakeholder systems. > > Paul R. Lehto, J.D. > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 00:38:13 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:08:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > ... moved to a different website and we required everyone who was > attending in person to re-register, for purposes of arranging logistics on > the ground... Oops. Do let us know when you're up and we'll be ready to register :) -C On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Since being cross-posted to the governance list, this thread has lost a > bit of context. So just to backtrack, Ginger was not talking about > registration for the IGF, which I have nothing to do with. Actually as you > may know, I've been probably the longest campaigner for improvement in > support for online participation in the IGF,[0] including the ability for > remote participants to register online.[1] So no argument there. > > She was talking about Best Bits, the civil society meeting planned for 3-4 > November, for which I've been the lead organiser. In that case, remote > participation was treated as integral from the start, and remote > participants were invited at the outset to register themselves at the same > time and in the same manner as everyone else.[2] > > However since then, we have moved to a different website and we required > everyone who was attending in person to re-register, for purposes of > arranging logistics on the ground.[3] Meanwhile I haven't yet provided a > new mechanism for remote participants to register (or re-register), but am > working on that this weekend. All the other facilities for remote > participants are, however, already in place and have been for some time.[4] > > Hope that clarifies. > > [0] http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=1.0 dating way back to > 2006 > [1] See half-way down page 2 of > http://igf.wgig.org/Contributions-Sept_2008/OCDC_Jeremy-Malcolm.pdf > [2] See under "Participants" at http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/BestBits, and > also http://bit.ly/SqnzeS > [3] http://bestbits.igf-online.net > [4] http://bestbits.igf-online.net/streaming/ > > On 26/10/2012, at 1:08 AM, Narine Khachatryan < > ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear all, > > I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. > > Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? > > 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able > to travel. (!) > > In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some > citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another > email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot > visit Azerbaijan. > > I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? > > Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the > event including remote participants. > > Regards, Narine > > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > >> Hi Jeremy and al, >> I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not >> be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested >> to register. >> >> If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, >> I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in >> the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. >> >> While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room >> purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it >> becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important >> acknowledgement of our presence. >> >> I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be >> treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, >> as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of >> the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote >> Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote >> participants as equal members of a meeting. >> >> I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) >> >> With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's >> input, >> >> Ginger >> Ginger (Virginia) Paque >> >> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >> Diplo Foundation >> Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >> www.diplomacy.edu/ig >> ** >> ** >> >> >> >> On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: >> >>> Hi Jeremy >>> >>> Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a >>> bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each >>> other? Even just links to home pages would help... >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>> >>> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered >>> participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at >>> Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at >>> http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >>> >>> Andrew Puddephatt >>> Anja Kovacs >>> Anriette Esterhuysen >>> Antonio Medina Gomez >>> Arthit Suriyawongkul >>> Avri Doria >>> Brett Solomon >>> Claudio Ruiz >>> Deborah Brown >>> Dixie Hawtin >>> Elonnai Hickok >>> Emma Llanso >>> Gene Kimmelman >>> Iarla Flynn >>> Imran Ahmed Shah >>> Jeremy Malcolm >>> Jochai Ben-Avie >>> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>> Joy Liddicoat >>> Katitza Rodriguez >>> Kevin Bankston >>> Matthew Shears >>> Michael Gurstein >>> Norbert Bollow >>> Parminder Jeet Singh >>> Pranesh Prakash >>> Premila Kumar >>> Raquel Gatto >>> Rashmi Rangnath >>> Shita Laksmi >>> Tapani Tarvainen >>> Theresa Züger >>> Valeria Betancourt >>> William Drake >>> * * >>> -- >>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > www.safe.am > www.immasin.am > www.mediaeducation.am > > Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > 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.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: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 02:15:08 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 08:15:08 +0200 Subject: [governance] Boeing Successfully Tests Microwave Missile That Takes Out Electronic Targets Message-ID: <077101cdb341$750c02e0$5f2408a0$@gmail.com> http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/10/25/boeing-successfully-tests-microwave-m issile-that-takes-out-electronic-targets/ HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah (CBS St. Louis) - Boeing successfully tests a new missile that can take out electronic targets with little collateral damage. The aerospace company tested the microwave missile last week on a two-story building on the Utah Test and Training Range where computers and electronic systems were turned on to gauge the effects of the missile's radio waves, according to a Boeing press release. The missile, known as CHAMP (Counter-electronics High-powered Advanced Missile Project), fired a burst of High Powered Microwaves at the building, successfully knocking out the electronic systems and computers, and even taking out the television cameras recording the test. "This technology marks a new era in modern-day warfare," Keith Coleman, CHAMP program manager for Boeing Phantom Works, said in the press release. "In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy's electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or aircraft arrive." Seven targets were taken out in total during the one-hour test which left no collateral damage. Coleman believes this can be a huge advancement forward in non-lethal warfare. "Today we turned science fiction into science fact," Coleman said in the press release. James Dodd, vice president of Advanced Boeing Military Aircraft, is hoping to get these microwave missiles in the field sooner rather than later. Members of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory Directed Energy Directorate and Raytheon Ktech also took part in the test. Boeing Defense, Space & Security division is headquartered in St. Louis. __._,_.___ Reply via web post Reply to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group Yahoo! Groups Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use . Send us Feedback . http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=15209059/grpspId=1705083512/msgId =20803/stime=1351196825/nc1=5191955/nc2=3858795/nc3=5758221 __,_._,___ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2303 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: application/octet-stream Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 03:41:57 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:11:57 +0530 Subject: [governance] Boeing Successfully Tests Microwave Missile That Takes Out Electronic Targets In-Reply-To: <077101cdb341$750c02e0$5f2408a0$@gmail.com> References: <077101cdb341$750c02e0$5f2408a0$@gmail.com> Message-ID: Well we had laser weapons (not laser guided actual cutting lasers made into weapons) made a while back - dont see much of them in the field though. Given we're not indulging so much into modern day warfare (there may be some here and there but it's not on a world wide scale) - I doubt we'll actually see many of these in action anyways. Good step forward though, maybe they'll make a more efficient microwave and we'll see lower food-reheating bills. -C On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 11:45 AM, michael gurstein wrote: > > http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/10/25/boeing-successfully-tests-microwave-missile-that-takes-out-electronic-targets/ > **** > > HILL AIR FORCE BASE, Utah (CBS St. Louis) — Boeing successfully tests a > new missile that can take out electronic targets with little collateral > damage.**** > > The aerospace company tested the microwave missile last week on a > two-story building on the Utah Test and Training Range where computers and > electronic systems were turned on to gauge the effects of the missile’s > radio waves, according to a Boeing press release.**** > > The missile, known as CHAMP (Counter-electronics High-powered Advanced > Missile Project), fired a burst of High Powered Microwaves at the building, > successfully knocking out the electronic systems and computers, and even > taking out the television cameras recording the test.**** > > “This technology marks a new era in modern-day warfare,” Keith Coleman, > CHAMP program manager for Boeing Phantom Works, said in the press release. > “In the near future, this technology may be used to render an enemy’s > electronic and data systems useless even before the first troops or > aircraft arrive.”**** > > **** > > Seven targets were taken out in total during the one-hour test which left > no collateral damage.**** > > Coleman believes this can be a huge advancement forward in non-lethal > warfare.**** > > “Today we turned science fiction into science fact,” Coleman said in the > press release.**** > > James Dodd, vice president of Advanced Boeing Military Aircraft, is hoping > to get these microwave missiles in the field sooner rather than later.**** > > Members of the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory Directed Energy > Directorate and Raytheon Ktech also took part in the test.**** > > Boeing Defense, Space & Security division is headquartered in St. Louis.** > ** > > **** > > **** > > __._,_.___**** > > *Reply via web post > * > > Reply to sender > > **** > > Reply to group > > **** > > Start a New Topic > **** > > Messages in this topic(1) > **** > > *Recent Activity:* **** > > Visit Your Group > **** > > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > **** > > Switch to: Text-Only, > Daily Digest• > Unsubscribe• Terms > of Use • Send us Feedback > > **** > > .**** > > [image: > http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=15209059/grpspId=1705083512/msgId=20803/stime=1351196825/nc1=5191955/nc2=3858795/nc3=5758221] > **** > > __,_._,___**** > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: application/octet-stream Size: 2303 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: application/octet-stream Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From info at freshmail.de Fri Oct 26 06:16:51 2012 From: info at freshmail.de (Matthias Pfeifer Freshmail) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 12:16:51 +0200 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list References: Message-ID: <81C9403826B14DE5A6AC20E55BDCEFBC@stateless> ++ ( pobably +9 ) ----- Original Message ----- From: Walid AL-SAQAF To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:14 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Final registration list +8 I join my voice of support to Ginger on this and feel that remote participation must be a crucial component of every IGF event. I've used it effectively last time and would love to have it as an established practice. Sincerely, Walid ----------------- Walid Al-Saqaf Founder & Administrator alkasir for mapping and circumventing cyber censorship https://alkasir.com On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Narine Khachatryan wrote: Dear all, I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able to travel. (!) In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot visit Azerbaijan. I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the event including remote participants. Regards, Narine On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: Hi Jeremy and al, I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested to register. If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important acknowledgement of our presence. I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote participants as equal members of a meeting. I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's input, Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: Hi Jeremy Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each other? Even just links to home pages would help... Bill On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: A couple of people have requested the final list of registered participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! Andrew Puddephatt Anja Kovacs Anriette Esterhuysen Antonio Medina Gomez Arthit Suriyawongkul Avri Doria Brett Solomon Claudio Ruiz Deborah Brown Dixie Hawtin Elonnai Hickok Emma Llanso Gene Kimmelman Iarla Flynn Imran Ahmed Shah Jeremy Malcolm Jochai Ben-Avie Joonas Mikael Mäkinen Joy Liddicoat Katitza Rodriguez Kevin Bankston Matthew Shears Michael Gurstein Norbert Bollow Parminder Jeet Singh Pranesh Prakash Premila Kumar Raquel Gatto Rashmi Rangnath Shita Laksmi Tapani Tarvainen Theresa Züger Valeria Betancourt William Drake -- Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' -- www.safe.am www.immasin.am www.mediaeducation.am Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan ____________________________________________________________ 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 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 07:21:27 2012 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 06:21:27 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks to everyone who supports remote participation, especially/including Jeremy. One good thing about this incident is the discussion emphasizing the need to allow remote participants to register as full attendees to events, especially global policy discussion meetings. Jeremy, I look forward to being able to register as a remote participant soon, hopefully after the weekend. Thanks for your generosity with your time, expertise and energy. Quick note: those of us who support the IGF process and remote participation, and won't be in Baku, need to plan to be available for these 5 days, in a similar way to those who travel to Baku. I find it is helpful to switch to the local (Baku) time when attending a meeting 'remotely'. To be taken seriously, remote participants have to take attending the meeting seriously too. Most RPers do... This is just a note for first timers. We really have to take on the mindset of 'going to the IGF' to make the most of RP. Best wishes, Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 25 October 2012 20:32, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > Since being cross-posted to the governance list, this thread has lost a > bit of context. So just to backtrack, Ginger was not talking about > registration for the IGF, which I have nothing to do with. Actually as you > may know, I've been probably the longest campaigner for improvement in > support for online participation in the IGF,[0] including the ability for > remote participants to register online.[1] So no argument there. > > She was talking about Best Bits, the civil society meeting planned for 3-4 > November, for which I've been the lead organiser. In that case, remote > participation was treated as integral from the start, and remote > participants were invited at the outset to register themselves at the same > time and in the same manner as everyone else.[2] > > However since then, we have moved to a different website and we required > everyone who was attending in person to re-register, for purposes of > arranging logistics on the ground.[3] Meanwhile I haven't yet provided a > new mechanism for remote participants to register (or re-register), but am > working on that this weekend. All the other facilities for remote > participants are, however, already in place and have been for some time.[4] > > Hope that clarifies. > > [0] http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=1.0 dating way back to > 2006 > [1] See half-way down page 2 of > http://igf.wgig.org/Contributions-Sept_2008/OCDC_Jeremy-Malcolm.pdf > [2] See under "Participants" at http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/BestBits, and > also http://bit.ly/SqnzeS > [3] http://bestbits.igf-online.net > [4] http://bestbits.igf-online.net/streaming/ > > On 26/10/2012, at 1:08 AM, Narine Khachatryan < > ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear all, > > I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. > > Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? > > 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able > to travel. (!) > > In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some > citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another > email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot > visit Azerbaijan. > > I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? > > Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the > event including remote participants. > > Regards, Narine > > > > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > >> Hi Jeremy and al, >> I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not >> be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested >> to register. >> >> If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and knowledge, >> I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being included in >> the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are perceived. >> >> While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room >> purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it >> becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important >> acknowledgement of our presence. >> >> I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be >> treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, >> as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of >> the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote >> Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote >> participants as equal members of a meeting. >> >> I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) >> >> With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's >> input, >> >> Ginger >> Ginger (Virginia) Paque >> >> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >> Diplo Foundation >> Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >> www.diplomacy.edu/ig >> ** >> ** >> >> >> >> On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: >> >>> Hi Jeremy >>> >>> Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach a >>> bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each >>> other? Even just links to home pages would help... >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>> >>> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered >>> participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at >>> Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at >>> http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >>> >>> Andrew Puddephatt >>> Anja Kovacs >>> Anriette Esterhuysen >>> Antonio Medina Gomez >>> Arthit Suriyawongkul >>> Avri Doria >>> Brett Solomon >>> Claudio Ruiz >>> Deborah Brown >>> Dixie Hawtin >>> Elonnai Hickok >>> Emma Llanso >>> Gene Kimmelman >>> Iarla Flynn >>> Imran Ahmed Shah >>> Jeremy Malcolm >>> Jochai Ben-Avie >>> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>> Joy Liddicoat >>> Katitza Rodriguez >>> Kevin Bankston >>> Matthew Shears >>> Michael Gurstein >>> Norbert Bollow >>> Parminder Jeet Singh >>> Pranesh Prakash >>> Premila Kumar >>> Raquel Gatto >>> Rashmi Rangnath >>> Shita Laksmi >>> Tapani Tarvainen >>> Theresa Züger >>> Valeria Betancourt >>> William Drake >>> * * >>> -- >>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > www.safe.am > www.immasin.am > www.mediaeducation.am > > Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 07:56:28 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 17:26:28 +0530 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Ginger, About the timezone thing - I usually make it a point to keep 3 important timezones on my clock (windows 7) - usually it's local time, UTC and one other timezone depending on which is important - plus tungle.me offers some superb cross-timezone scheduling capabilities. Best, Chaitanya On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > Thanks to everyone who supports remote participation, especially/including > Jeremy. One good thing about this incident is the discussion emphasizing > the need to allow remote participants to register as full attendees to > events, especially global policy discussion meetings. > > Jeremy, I look forward to being able to register as a remote participant > soon, hopefully after the weekend. Thanks for your generosity with your > time, expertise and energy. > > Quick note: those of us who support the IGF process and remote > participation, and won't be in Baku, need to plan to be available for these > 5 days, in a similar way to those who travel to Baku. I find it is helpful > to switch to the local (Baku) time when attending a meeting 'remotely'. To > be taken seriously, remote participants have to take attending the meeting > seriously too. Most RPers do... This is just a note for first timers. We > really have to take on the mindset of 'going to the IGF' to make the most > of RP. > > Best wishes, > > Ginger > > > > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > ** > ** > > > > On 25 October 2012 20:32, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> Since being cross-posted to the governance list, this thread has lost a >> bit of context. So just to backtrack, Ginger was not talking about >> registration for the IGF, which I have nothing to do with. Actually as you >> may know, I've been probably the longest campaigner for improvement in >> support for online participation in the IGF,[0] including the ability for >> remote participants to register online.[1] So no argument there. >> >> She was talking about Best Bits, the civil society meeting planned for >> 3-4 November, for which I've been the lead organiser. In that case, remote >> participation was treated as integral from the start, and remote >> participants were invited at the outset to register themselves at the same >> time and in the same manner as everyone else.[2] >> >> However since then, we have moved to a different website and we required >> everyone who was attending in person to re-register, for purposes of >> arranging logistics on the ground.[3] Meanwhile I haven't yet provided a >> new mechanism for remote participants to register (or re-register), but am >> working on that this weekend. All the other facilities for remote >> participants are, however, already in place and have been for some time.[4] >> >> Hope that clarifies. >> >> [0] http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=1.0 dating way back to >> 2006 >> [1] See half-way down page 2 of >> http://igf.wgig.org/Contributions-Sept_2008/OCDC_Jeremy-Malcolm.pdf >> [2] See under "Participants" at http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/BestBits, and >> also http://bit.ly/SqnzeS >> [3] http://bestbits.igf-online.net >> [4] http://bestbits.igf-online.net/streaming/ >> >> On 26/10/2012, at 1:08 AM, Narine Khachatryan < >> ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. >> >> Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? >> >> 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able >> to travel. (!) >> >> In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some >> citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another >> email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot >> visit Azerbaijan. >> >> I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? >> >> Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the >> event including remote participants. >> >> Regards, Narine >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: >> >>> Hi Jeremy and al, >>> I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not >>> be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested >>> to register. >>> >>> If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and >>> knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being >>> included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are >>> perceived. >>> >>> While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room >>> purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it >>> becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important >>> acknowledgement of our presence. >>> >>> I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be >>> treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, >>> as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of >>> the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote >>> Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote >>> participants as equal members of a meeting. >>> >>> I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) >>> >>> With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's >>> input, >>> >>> Ginger >>> Ginger (Virginia) Paque >>> >>> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >>> Diplo Foundation >>> Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >>> www.diplomacy.edu/ig >>> ** >>> ** >>> >>> >>> >>> On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jeremy >>>> >>>> Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach >>>> a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each >>>> other? Even just links to home pages would help... >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>>> >>>> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered >>>> participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at >>>> Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at >>>> http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >>>> >>>> Andrew Puddephatt >>>> Anja Kovacs >>>> Anriette Esterhuysen >>>> Antonio Medina Gomez >>>> Arthit Suriyawongkul >>>> Avri Doria >>>> Brett Solomon >>>> Claudio Ruiz >>>> Deborah Brown >>>> Dixie Hawtin >>>> Elonnai Hickok >>>> Emma Llanso >>>> Gene Kimmelman >>>> Iarla Flynn >>>> Imran Ahmed Shah >>>> Jeremy Malcolm >>>> Jochai Ben-Avie >>>> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>>> Joy Liddicoat >>>> Katitza Rodriguez >>>> Kevin Bankston >>>> Matthew Shears >>>> Michael Gurstein >>>> Norbert Bollow >>>> Parminder Jeet Singh >>>> Pranesh Prakash >>>> Premila Kumar >>>> Raquel Gatto >>>> Rashmi Rangnath >>>> Shita Laksmi >>>> Tapani Tarvainen >>>> Theresa Züger >>>> Valeria Betancourt >>>> William Drake >>>> * * >>>> -- >>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >>>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> www.safe.am >> www.immasin.am >> www.mediaeducation.am >> >> Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> -- >> >> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> Senior Policy Officer >> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* >> 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 >> >> *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> >> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> 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.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: -------------- 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 From williams.deirdre at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 09:06:55 2012 From: williams.deirdre at gmail.com (Deirdre Williams) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:06:55 -0400 Subject: [governance] Re: Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: One possible indicator that you might be "doing it right" is when you have jet lag without leaving your house :-( I also believe that it's time we drop "remote", as an adjective and begin to think about participants, some of whom are attending online. And I suspect that the onus is on the "some of whom are attending online" to keep on steadily demanding their rights, and on those who are "there" this time to help as much as possible with facilitating inclusion. Ginger, Narine, I look forward to meeting you at the IGF in Baku :-) Deirdre On 26 October 2012 07:21, Ginger Paque wrote: > Thanks to everyone who supports remote participation, especially/including > Jeremy. One good thing about this incident is the discussion emphasizing > the need to allow remote participants to register as full attendees to > events, especially global policy discussion meetings. > > Jeremy, I look forward to being able to register as a remote participant > soon, hopefully after the weekend. Thanks for your generosity with your > time, expertise and energy. > > Quick note: those of us who support the IGF process and remote > participation, and won't be in Baku, need to plan to be available for these > 5 days, in a similar way to those who travel to Baku. I find it is helpful > to switch to the local (Baku) time when attending a meeting 'remotely'. To > be taken seriously, remote participants have to take attending the meeting > seriously too. Most RPers do... This is just a note for first timers. We > really have to take on the mindset of 'going to the IGF' to make the most > of RP. > > Best wishes, > > Ginger > > > > Ginger (Virginia) Paque > > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu > Diplo Foundation > Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme > www.diplomacy.edu/ig > ** > ** > > > > On 25 October 2012 20:32, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > >> Since being cross-posted to the governance list, this thread has lost a >> bit of context. So just to backtrack, Ginger was not talking about >> registration for the IGF, which I have nothing to do with. Actually as you >> may know, I've been probably the longest campaigner for improvement in >> support for online participation in the IGF,[0] including the ability for >> remote participants to register online.[1] So no argument there. >> >> She was talking about Best Bits, the civil society meeting planned for >> 3-4 November, for which I've been the lead organiser. In that case, remote >> participation was treated as integral from the start, and remote >> participants were invited at the outset to register themselves at the same >> time and in the same manner as everyone else.[2] >> >> However since then, we have moved to a different website and we required >> everyone who was attending in person to re-register, for purposes of >> arranging logistics on the ground.[3] Meanwhile I haven't yet provided a >> new mechanism for remote participants to register (or re-register), but am >> working on that this weekend. All the other facilities for remote >> participants are, however, already in place and have been for some time.[4] >> >> Hope that clarifies. >> >> [0] http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?topic=1.0 dating way back to >> 2006 >> [1] See half-way down page 2 of >> http://igf.wgig.org/Contributions-Sept_2008/OCDC_Jeremy-Malcolm.pdf >> [2] See under "Participants" at http://igcaucus.org:9001/p/BestBits, and >> also http://bit.ly/SqnzeS >> [3] http://bestbits.igf-online.net >> [4] http://bestbits.igf-online.net/streaming/ >> >> On 26/10/2012, at 1:08 AM, Narine Khachatryan < >> ms.narine.khachatryan at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Dear all, >> >> I absolutely agree with what Ginger says. >> >> Why remote participants are not suggested to register??? >> >> 1. The IGF is being organized in a place, where many people are not able >> to travel. (!) >> >> In particular, those who live in Armenia, have Armenian origin, some >> citizens of other countries (if necessary I will explain who in another >> email), and all those who value highly their privacy - they all cannot >> visit Azerbaijan. >> >> I repeat, why remote participants are not counted on this event? >> >> Again, I fully support Ginger's suggestion to enlarge the frames of the >> event including remote participants. >> >> Regards, Narine >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: >> >>> Hi Jeremy and al, >>> I see you have removed my name from the registration list, as I will not >>> be present in Baku. I also note that remote participants are not suggested >>> to register. >>> >>> If this list is to assist networking and exchange of ideas and >>> knowledge, I think that those of us who are remote would appreciate being >>> included in the list, so our 'invisible' presence and interest are >>> perceived. >>> >>> While the list's first purpose surely was for planning meeting room >>> purposes, now that it is being circulated for networking exchange, it >>> becomes even more valuable to remote participants. This is an important >>> acknowledgement of our presence. >>> >>> I urge you to encourage remote participants to register, and to be >>> treated as full participants, not just observers of this important meeting, >>> as much as is possible. Remote participation is one of the 'Best Bits' of >>> the IGF, and I know you support it fully. One of the points the IGF Remote >>> Participation Working Group prioritizes is the registration of remote >>> participants as equal members of a meeting. >>> >>> I will re-register, knowing my name will stay on the list :) >>> >>> With much appreciation for your energy and organization, and everyone's >>> input, >>> >>> Ginger >>> Ginger (Virginia) Paque >>> >>> VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu >>> Diplo Foundation >>> Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme >>> www.diplomacy.edu/ig >>> ** >>> ** >>> >>> >>> >>> On 25 October 2012 06:53, William Drake wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jeremy >>>> >>>> Good to see this is moving along. Is there any chance we could attach >>>> a bit more info to the names for the benefit of those who don't know each >>>> other? Even just links to home pages would help... >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> On Oct 25, 2012, at 4:33 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: >>>> >>>> A couple of people have requested the final list of registered >>>> participants, so here it is. If you are not shown here and plan to be at >>>> Best Bits in person, please let me know and register now at >>>> http://bestbits.igf-online.net/. Thanks! >>>> >>>> Andrew Puddephatt >>>> Anja Kovacs >>>> Anriette Esterhuysen >>>> Antonio Medina Gomez >>>> Arthit Suriyawongkul >>>> Avri Doria >>>> Brett Solomon >>>> Claudio Ruiz >>>> Deborah Brown >>>> Dixie Hawtin >>>> Elonnai Hickok >>>> Emma Llanso >>>> Gene Kimmelman >>>> Iarla Flynn >>>> Imran Ahmed Shah >>>> Jeremy Malcolm >>>> Jochai Ben-Avie >>>> Joonas Mikael Mäkinen >>>> Joy Liddicoat >>>> Katitza Rodriguez >>>> Kevin Bankston >>>> Matthew Shears >>>> Michael Gurstein >>>> Norbert Bollow >>>> Parminder Jeet Singh >>>> Pranesh Prakash >>>> Premila Kumar >>>> Raquel Gatto >>>> Rashmi Rangnath >>>> Shita Laksmi >>>> Tapani Tarvainen >>>> Theresa Züger >>>> Valeria Betancourt >>>> William Drake >>>> * * >>>> -- >>>> Jeremy Malcolm PhD LLB (Hons) B Com >>>> Internet and Open Source lawyer, consumer advocate, geek >>>> host -t NAPTR 5.9.8.5.2.8.2.2.1.0.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}' >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> www.safe.am >> www.immasin.am >> www.mediaeducation.am >> >> Linkedin Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/narinekhachatryan >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> -- >> >> *Dr Jeremy Malcolm >> Senior Policy Officer >> Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* >> 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 >> >> *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* >> http://consint.info/RightsMission >> >> @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | >> www.facebook.com/consumersinternational >> >> 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.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 > > -- “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: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Fri Oct 26 09:22:25 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:22:25 +0000 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Paul "popular support" does not mean one person, or even two people. I mean a widespread mobilization among either civil society or business or both, demanding greater UN involvement. You show me such a mobilization and I will eat those words. From: Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:45 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Milton L Mueller > wrote: [snip] There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in Internet governance. With the caveat that it be appropriately drafted and designed, I would support greater UN involvement in Internet governance. In any case, at minimum, it would appear that greater involvement by this listserv in Internet governance might be fairly said to be greater UN involvement. Is this problematic -- is there "no popular support" for anything greater when it comes to the UN? "NO popular support" is a very strong statement, and as applied to "greater UN involvement" it is not true since at least one person expressing support would be more than "no" support, and I have done so above. It would be easy to expand the number of counterexamples. This statement of "no popular support" appears to be a specific example of at least exaggeration if not false claim regarding what amounts to the mantle of democracy, since democracy is supposed to be responsive to popular support and is somewhat interchangeable in this context. I would be happy to allow Mr. Mueller the latitude to make what amount in part to political arguments, but it seems that in the course of this email I refer to below, a stricter policy in terms of how one characterizes support or the lack thereof is being urged by Mr. Mueller, so I think it's only fair to hold him to about the same standard he urges for others. Paul Lehto, J.D. Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org > -----Original Message----- > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder > Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > Internet Economy > > Parminder, > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > > wrote: > > > > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > > Internet policy making. > > My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, > rather an effort > to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). > > It's clear we see the world differently. > > -- > 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.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 -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Oct 26 10:59:45 2012 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 22:59:45 +0800 Subject: [governance] Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 26/10/2012, at 7:21 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > Thanks to everyone who supports remote participation, especially/including Jeremy. One good thing about this incident is the discussion emphasizing the need to allow remote participants to register as full attendees to events, especially global policy discussion meetings. > > Jeremy, I look forward to being able to register as a remote participant soon, hopefully after the weekend. Thanks for your generosity with your time, expertise and energy. OK done, now remote participants can register for Best Bits here (but Ginger, you are already done): http://bestbits.igf-online.net/participants/ Please everyone check, if your name is on the list, that it is in the right place. Although remote participants are equal for most purposes, they are not equal for the purposes of catering! ;-) -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers 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 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gpaque at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 11:08:25 2012 From: gpaque at gmail.com (Ginger Paque) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:08:25 -0500 Subject: [governance] Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You rock, Jeremy! Thanks so very much. Ginger Ginger (Virginia) Paque VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu Diplo Foundation Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme www.diplomacy.edu/ig ** ** On 26 October 2012 09:59, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 26/10/2012, at 7:21 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > > Thanks to everyone who supports remote participation, especially/including > Jeremy. One good thing about this incident is the discussion emphasizing > the need to allow remote participants to register as full attendees to > events, especially global policy discussion meetings. > > Jeremy, I look forward to being able to register as a remote participant > soon, hopefully after the weekend. Thanks for your generosity with your > time, expertise and energy. > > > OK done, now remote participants can register for Best Bits here (but > Ginger, you are already done): > > http://bestbits.igf-online.net/participants/ > > Please everyone check, if your name is on the list, that it is in the > right place. Although remote participants are equal for most purposes, > they are not equal for the purposes of catering! ;-) > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From anriette at apc.org Fri Oct 26 11:14:41 2012 From: anriette at apc.org (Anriette Esterhuysen) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 17:14:41 +0200 Subject: [governance] IGF pre-event on enhanced cooperation In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <508AA8E1.1080706@apc.org> Dear all Please try to come to the pre-event on enhanced cooperation that will take place on 5 November in Baku. More information and registration available at http://ec-event-igf2012.apc.org Programme is also attached. Webcasting is being organised and we will send updated details next week. Best regards Anriette -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IGF Pre-Event Overview_Oct26Copy*.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 188330 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 12:43:53 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 12:43:53 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Paul**** > > “popular support” does not mean one person, or even two people. **** > > I mean a widespread mobilization among either civil society or business or > both, demanding greater UN involvement. > Omigods. I can't believe that you would count a "widespread mobilization" *among business alone* (or business and "civil society") as meeting the definition of "popular support." From the perspective of democracy (which counts only human beings as having a vote, not businesses) your honesty here is almost mind-blowing. Widespread business support could easily mean a couple people at most plus a few hundred or thousand simply paid to support the profitability of the company but who don't really believe in the proposal in question or don't consider their personal belief relevant to doing their job and simply set aside their own views. But I see that you have already eaten ONE of your words, the word "no" -- since you are now putting "popular support" as the phrase in question rather than your original words, which were "no popular support." Under your "widespread mobilization" test, only the very, very rich can mobilize public opinion, either those rich in money or very, very rich in volunteers. Milton, I think you and I, as residents of the United States, know precious little about the particulars of what the people of the global south show popular support for, or would show popular support for. No matter how many MS meetings one attends, civil society groups from this general area legitimately speak on behalf only of their group members, and to the extent they purport to speak for anyone else besides however many members they have it is just as much of a usurpation of authority as if you purported to speak for me, or if I purported to speak for you. I trust we can both agree that it would be wrongful for either of us to purport to characterize the position of the other without authority to do so. One might reach out through polling and such to get a better feel for popular opinion in a given area. This would make for a more informed process, but unless and until those who purport to speak for the global south or anywhere else including North America speak for others specifically after having been authorized to represent them via elections somehow, there is no legitimacy to the representation of any but the group members who perhaps have had a vote and a voice in what the delegate to the MS meeting might say or support. In polling and communication generally, how the question is asked is critical: If one asks "should the UN control the Internet" the vast majority would say no. But if one asks a more specific question, (others could surely phrase a better example here) like "Do you support a free, open internet with *consistent worldwide laws* and rules instead of a patchwork, fragmented internet?" the vast majority would say Yes. Now, if the only way to have consistent worldwide laws and rules is through some form of actual or defacto world government, then I think people will change or have changed their minds on the world government issue and if the UN is the only entity set up that might handle such a task, then I think there arguably is widespread popular support for UN involvement, but NOBODY WILL THINK OF IT IN THOSE "UN" TERMS at least initially. AT least it is strongly arguable that some form of limited world government is clearly in the public interest, though perhaps widespread "popular support" is something that is only achieved after folks who are very, very rich in either money or time choose to do the necessary public education and mobilization. Note that the cost to mobilize "business" in favor of a proposal that affects their bottom line is truly tiny compared to the cost to mobilize the public, but either one of them is something Milton will consider to meet the definition of "popular support." And I find that revealing of political attitude. One can always choose to consider business opinion Important, but to equate and conflate it with the democratic idea of popular support and thereby give business opinion the patina of widespread popular support is quite wrong. Paul Lehto, J.D. **** > > You show me such a mobilization and I will eat those words. **** > > ** ** > > *From:* Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:45 PM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller > > *Subject:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on > the Internet Economy**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > **** > > [snip] There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in > Internet governance. **** > > > With the caveat that it be appropriately drafted and designed, I would > support greater UN involvement in Internet governance. In any case, at > minimum, it would appear that greater involvement by this listserv in > Internet governance might be fairly said to be greater UN involvement. Is > this problematic -- is there "no popular support" for anything greater when > it comes to the UN? > > "NO popular support" is a very strong statement, and as applied to > "greater UN involvement" it is not true since at least one person > expressing support would be more than "no" support, and I have done so > above. It would be easy to expand the number of counterexamples. > > This statement of "no popular support" appears to be a specific example of > at least exaggeration if not false claim regarding what amounts to the > mantle of democracy, since democracy is supposed to be responsive to > popular support and is somewhat interchangeable in this context. > > I would be happy to allow Mr. Mueller the latitude to make what amount in > part to political arguments, but it seems that in the course of this email > I refer to below, a stricter policy in terms of how one characterizes > support or the lack thereof is being urged by Mr. Mueller, so I think it's > only fair to hold him to about the same standard he urges for others. > > Paul Lehto, J.D.**** > > Milton L. Mueller > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies > Internet Governance Project > http://blog.internetgovernance.org**** > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- > > request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim > > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder > > Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the > > Internet Economy > >**** > > > Parminder, > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the > > > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > > > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global > > > Internet policy making. > > > > My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, > > rather an effort > > to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). > > > > It's clear we see the world differently. > > > > -- > > 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.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**** > > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > **** > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 13:02:29 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:02:29 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Norbert Klein wrote: > No. > > There is not only ONE stakeholder who becomes THE legislator - but there > are MULTI stakeholders. In the absence and impossibility of taking > universal votes on IG issues, I am not surprised about - and I share - the > opinion of many that multi-stakeholder systems are the most practical ones > that avoid that ONE stakeholder decides everything, and gives many opinions > access to public discussion, even while decisions are organized not as a > result of a vote in a multi-stakeholder forum. > The critical - and illegitimate - move in the above is to redefine democratically elected representatives as merely ONE stakeholder among many. This radically demotes the only legitimate form of governance - those that derive their authority from the consent of the governed via elections - to just one voice among many (undemocratic) voices. Yes, there are world governments that are not democratically elected so I suppose this is one throws the democratic baby out with the undemocratic bathwater in favor of an almost entirely undemocratic MS government system, which is now called "governance" to effectively disguise its true nature. As with all systems of government, those that like their chances in the undemocratic system tend very highly to support it for all the "practical" reasons Norbert Klein refers to in his use of the word "practical" above. Paul Lehto, J.D. > Norbert Klein > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > and dispense with all public elections and not only write the laws but > pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up courts of > arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to go to the > court system set up by democracies. > > A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law is > just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. Multistakeholderism is a > coup d'etat against democracy by those who would merely be lobbyists in a > democratic system. So yes, I think it is misleading at best to use the > word "democratic" in reference to multistakeholder systems. > > Paul R. Lehto, J.D. > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Fri Oct 26 13:25:56 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:25:56 -0700 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Oct 26, 2012, at 9:43 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > But if one asks a more specific question, (others could surely phrase a better example here) like "Do you support a free, open internet with consistent worldwide laws and rules instead of a patchwork, fragmented internet?" the vast majority would say Yes. I suspect you are wrong. I believe the vast majority want "consistent worldwide laws" to not promulgate content they personally deem "socially damaging" and they most definitely do not want someone from "over there" (including the UN) to define what "socially damaging" means. In the mid-90s, one of the more eye opening experiences I had was sitting in a public community forum in a developing country listening to normal, everyday folks demand (quite forcefully) that the government take steps to limit access to content available on the Internet. Since that time, I have seen the same thing played out across numerous countries (including many liberal democracies). The reality is that globally consistent laws (at least not laws defined by 'others') on the Internet is _not_ what people want.. Regards, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From cveraq at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 14:40:04 2012 From: cveraq at gmail.com (Carlos Vera Quintana) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:40:04 -0500 Subject: [governance] Final registration list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Done! Great thanks Carlos Vera Quintana 593 9 88141143 El 26/10/2012, a las 9:59, Jeremy Malcolm escribió: > On 26/10/2012, at 7:21 PM, Ginger Paque wrote: > >> Thanks to everyone who supports remote participation, especially/including Jeremy. One good thing about this incident is the discussion emphasizing the need to allow remote participants to register as full attendees to events, especially global policy discussion meetings. >> >> Jeremy, I look forward to being able to register as a remote participant soon, hopefully after the weekend. Thanks for your generosity with your time, expertise and energy. > > > OK done, now remote participants can register for Best Bits here (but Ginger, you are already done): > > http://bestbits.igf-online.net/participants/ > > Please everyone check, if your name is on the list, that it is in the right place. Although remote participants are equal for most purposes, they are not equal for the purposes of catering! ;-) > > -- > Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers > 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 > > Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > 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.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: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 15:52:27 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:52:27 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 1:25 PM, David Conrad wrote: > On Oct 26, 2012, at 9:43 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > > But if one asks a more specific question, (others could surely phrase a > better example here) like "Do you support a free, open internet with *consistent > worldwide laws* and rules instead of a patchwork, fragmented internet?" > the vast majority would say Yes. > > > I believe the vast majority want "consistent worldwide laws" to not > promulgate content they personally deem "socially damaging" and they most > definitely do not want someone from "over there" (including the UN) to > define what "socially damaging" means. > I believe there are clearly some - a minority overall - that want that, and the intensity of their desire for it can make it seem like they are more like a majority. But what right does a minority have to rule a majority, and what right do dissenters have to ignore something that is truly the desire of the majority? A right in the nature of a constitutional right can overrule a majority, but not a super-majority necessary to amend the constitution. (Only inalienable rights survive super-majorities but those are most often ignored or dismissed by those in power, but at least this leaves those asserting inalienable rights a cause based on rights, as opposed to being mere violators of laws without a defense or a cause to protect them at all) Here again, you are giving an example of people taking positions that you don't like, and as a consequence dropping support for the political systems giving those people voice. Such an attitude, while understandable, leads to shopping around for whatever political system seems to give the best chance of enacting the rules and regulations one personally desires. This is, among other things, unprincipled, and leads to forms of governance that have no recognizable moral/political foundation. This is unstable to say the least. Given a "constitutional" level discussion, what one usually sees happen is that people are willing to give up their desires in terms of what content they might wish to censor in order to keep the content they like free, and vice versa. In other words, the Golden Rule comes into play and I am willing to grant freedom to others on the grounds that they are granting that same freedom to me, and if some content in some situations really needs to be censored (such as with young children) then this can be handled privately via filters and net nanny programs and the like. Absent a strong foundation, one might think that a relatively foundation-less system of multiple stakeholders without elections might handle things suitably FOR NOW, but in the long run such a system, without the protections of rights arising out of democratic constitutional-style discussions, ends up relatively quickly being what it has been all along, the control of the internet by the powerful at the expense of the relatively powerless. We are already seeing this regularly as private companies like Verizon and others take private action to limit content and because they are "not the government" in the USA there is a paucity of legal remedies to correct such private censorship. There is no intrinsic reason why the more powerful business interests should be permanently aligned with a free internet. The very same people that you see strongly pushing for content control at a governmental level can exert parallel control via boycotts and so forth to persuade an internet business to adopt parallel types of censorship. Certainly no business will understand why it must provide a forum or allow its resources to be utilized to criticize the business itself, and they will act to squash such criticism. So the same problems occur in the private sector as in the public sector. But in the private sector there is usually not even the pretense of accountability, nor any prospect of removing business officials who act poorly. In the public sector, while such prospects may often be either remote or difficult to accomplish, at least they exist. I think as problematic as democratically elected governments can be, private sector government via MS governance or other systems have all the same general problems, and more, in the long run. The reality is that globally consistent laws (at least not laws defined by 'others') on the Internet is _not_ what people want. The reality in terms of governance is that there will always be power players who move into the vacuum created by the absence of government. These players are even more "other" than governments are, and they can, will, and already have created de facto laws that negatively impact other people and the internet. You correctly observe that people usually don't want consistent laws DEFINED BY OTHERS. But they will want to see a "good" law given full, often global, application... If we don't have majority rule systems where the minority has to live with the fact that they lost a vote, the minorities never accept their defeats or the laws enacted and it is little more than a perpetual power struggle, with the minority more or less correctly pointing out that they are being undemocratically oppressed without legitimacy, while at the same time looking the other way at the legitimacy issue when they are on the winning side and their favorite policies are being enforced. *It's not a question of IF there will be worldwide government/governance, but a question of WHO will be the government/governors*. The global nature of the structure of the internet guarantees that.Technical-level isolation such as countries sealing themselves off from the worldwide internet are attempts based on sovereignty concerns (even if misguided) to replace the complex of mostly business interests that rule the internet with the local dictatorship or democracy, as the case may be. Those who keep saying "no worldwide government" ignore or conceal the fact that there already exists nascent worldwide government it is just somewhat fractured and disguised as "governance" - but it is the same thing. And there are no guarantees that this governance structure will remain in any way loyal to whatever we feel are right principles even if it seems to be largely supporting those right principles at the present time. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Oct 26 21:09:36 2012 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 09:09:36 +0800 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: On 27/10/2012, at 1:02 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > There is not only ONE stakeholder who becomes THE legislator - but there are MULTI stakeholders. In the absence and impossibility of taking universal votes on IG issues, I am not surprised about - and I share - the opinion of many that multi-stakeholder systems are the most practical ones that avoid that ONE stakeholder decides everything, and gives many opinions access to public discussion, even while decisions are organized not as a result of a vote in a multi-stakeholder forum. > > The critical - and illegitimate - move in the above is to redefine democratically elected representatives as merely ONE stakeholder among many. This radically demotes the only legitimate form of governance - those that derive their authority from the consent of the governed via elections - to just one voice among many (undemocratic) voices. So governments are the only legitimate stakeholders in Internet governance? I don't think you can just wave away the practical problems with this - the democratic deficits in all intergovernmental bodies, and the fact that there are transnational (border-crossing) interests that governments have no democratic mandate to take into account - so even in theory, they are not adequate representatives of the public interest. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers 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 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Fri Oct 26 21:52:37 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 21:52:37 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > On 27/10/2012, at 1:02 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > The critical - and illegitimate - move in the above is to redefine > democratically elected representatives as merely ONE stakeholder among > many. This radically demotes the only legitimate form of governance - > those that derive their authority from the consent of the governed via > elections - to just one voice among many (undemocratic) voices. > > So governments are the only legitimate stakeholders in Internet > governance? I don't think you can just wave away the practical problems > with this - the democratic deficits in all intergovernmental bodies, and > the fact that there are transnational (border-crossing) interests that > governments have no democratic mandate to take into account - so even in > theory, they are not adequate representatives of the public interest. > Jeremy just answer the question: What gives any individual or group the right to force other people to do their will by calling it "law"? Without this legitimacy, law is just force expressed by the powerful against the powerless. Does inheriting a throne confer legitimacy? Being annointed by God? Historically, through modern times, it's been considered very important to establish legitimacy of rule, so much so that royal bloodlines or myths were created in order to establish the right to rule. These are historically discredited in the vast majority of areas of the world, including those that feature ceremonial monarchs. The only method of obtaining legitimacy that has any significant appeal over a broad area is that of democracy, where the right to rule is derived from the consent of the governed via elections. Not being legitimate in the authority to rule is a huge practical problem. Why should anyone listen to or obey the rules of outfits lacking democratic legitimacy? Because they are enforced at the point of a gun, ultimately? That's rule through intimidation, and it doesn't help much if the rules are arguably wise if they are simply the product of force. On the other hand, if after a fair process of elections, either direct or through representatives, a result has been reached, the losing minority has participated and had its chance and must abide by the result and its enforcement. Question back to you Jeremy: What gives you, or any MS governance outfit, the right to force other people to do your will? If you can't trace your authority back to some election (e.g. being appointed by elected legislators, etc), then the public power you purport to exercise is illegitimate. No matter how weak, or strong, one considers the democratic monopoly on legitimacy to be, all other claims to legitimacy are significantly more fragile, much more questionable. If the claim is based on wisdom or expertise, why not make following the rules derived from that policy totally voluntary and based on persuasion of others and at all on enforced rules or standards? Paul Lehto, J.D. > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > Read our email confidentiality notice. > Don't print this email unless necessary. > > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From jeremy at ciroap.org Fri Oct 26 21:57:27 2012 From: jeremy at ciroap.org (Jeremy Malcolm) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 09:57:27 +0800 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: <10E19ACE-333C-486F-B0B5-46A4DEBA31C5@ciroap.org> On 27/10/2012, at 9:52 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > Question back to you Jeremy: What gives you, or any MS governance outfit, the right to force other people to do your will? If you can't trace your authority back to some election (e.g. being appointed by elected legislators, etc), then the public power you purport to exercise is illegitimate. > > No matter how weak, or strong, one considers the democratic monopoly on legitimacy to be, all other claims to legitimacy are significantly more fragile, much more questionable. If the claim is based on wisdom or expertise, why not make following the rules derived from that policy totally voluntary and based on persuasion of others and at all on enforced rules or standards? Well, that's exactly what all global multi-stakeholder processes are. -- Dr Jeremy Malcolm Senior Policy Officer Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers 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 Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015: http://consint.info/RightsMission @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org | www.facebook.com/consumersinternational Read our email confidentiality notice. Don't print this email unless necessary. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Oct 27 00:48:48 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 10:18:48 +0530 Subject: [governance] where did the 'mysterious' CIRP come from Message-ID: <508B67B0.2070604@itforchange.net> Hi All Sorry for the delay in posting my promised more detailed response to the Daily Mail article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2220692/How-India-helped-bunch-bureaucrats-custodians-Internet.html . I just has to wait for the weekend to get some time for it. The referred article builds over what has been made out by many actors, including some on this elist, to look like (1) the CIRP proposal was pulled out from nowhere by a set of evil minded actors and suddenly inflicted upon the world and (2) that CIRP is a proposal as devious as no other, which is out to put the Internet under governmental CONTROL. Both assertions are blatant propaganda and can easily be disproved by facts, of course, only to the extent facts matter in the middle of solid, well resourced, propaganda.... I sought to address the first of these issues in this email and the second one in my next email. I thought it would be 7-8 points but writing alternative history, against the dominant, 'normally' accepted and solidly entrenched versions, I realised is not at all an easy task. And so it is considerably longer than 7-8 points, whereby I considered it advisable to put it as an enclosed document. However, more that the history or the process of it, I am interested in discussing what CIRP really is, and the hypocrisy of its major detractors as they side with the current dominant mechanism of how the Internet is being shaped as per the interests of the powerful. Vide the enclosed, I have answered the questions that some had asked me on this list. I hope they will be as willing to answer my forthcoming questions (also asked often earlier) on substantive aspects of efforts at democratising global Internet policy making versus the current mechanisms that simply add power to the already most powerful. About that shortly.... parminder . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: where did the CIRP come from.doc Type: application/msword Size: 71168 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: where did the CIRP come from.odt Type: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text Size: 54552 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Sat Oct 27 05:59:04 2012 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 11:59:04 +0200 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: Let us agree in the different approaches: -the multi-stakeholder approach is the formula that has been and is regularly required in almost all processes of representation or decision; -if we consider the democratic dimension of the multi-stakeholder approach, it is necessary to define a procedure for every country, every community or different actors involved in the topic or issue; -when we accept and agree to the procedure, there is of course in terms of lobbyist becomes legislator it will also set the rules and the profile of the person or persons need. Baudouin 2012/10/26 Norbert Klein > On 10/24/2012 9:12 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: > > The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, those > who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote. > > In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much influence that > they even write the drafts of laws. But in multistakeholder situations > they take that scandal to a whole new level: those who would be lobbyists > in a democracy (corporations, experts, civil society) become the > legislators themselves, > > > No. > > There is not only ONE stakeholder who becomes THE legislator - but there > are MULTI stakeholders. In the absence and impossibility of taking > universal votes on IG issues, I am not surprised about - and I share - the > opinion of many that multi-stakeholder systems are the most practical ones > that avoid that ONE stakeholder decides everything, and gives many opinions > access to public discussion, even while decisions are organized not as a > result of a vote in a multi-stakeholder forum. > > Norbert Klein > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > > and dispense with all public elections and not only write the laws but > pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up courts of > arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the right to go to the > court system set up by democracies. > > A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, law is > just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. Multistakeholderism is a > coup d'etat against democracy by those who would merely be lobbyists in a > democratic system. So yes, I think it is misleading at best to use the > word "democratic" in reference to multistakeholder systems. > > Paul R. Lehto, J.D. > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Oct 27 10:05:13 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 19:35:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <508BEA19.5070206@itforchange.net> Milton, On Friday 26 October 2012 01:47 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > While it is obvious that the Daily Mail article was _not_ an impartial and sober assessment of the situation, Thanks for this 'sober' judgement. > it does seem to unearth background documents No background document has been unearthed. All concerned documents from IT for Change are open and public document, and also well publicized, including on this list. So please do not put intrigue where it doesnt belong. IT for Change first sought a CIRP like body in the UN DESA open consultations that you too attended. All contributions to the consultation, including ours. remain available on the UN website . It was also specifically distributed to this list and a discussion on it was attempted. > indicating that the CIRP proposal came from IT4Change, Some kind of CIRP was indeed proposed by us at the above UN meeting, and then also further elaborated in the background paper we did for Rio meeting. However, the CIRP proposal that India made in Oct 2011 to UN GA is quite distinctive in many respects. Please read the two documents and you can manifestly see the differences as well as similarities. > i.e., from Parminder, not from a groundswell of support from "the global South." The CIRP proposal puts in concrete detail things that most developing countries were demanding since at least 2003, and demanding repeatedly. Most concretely it was demanded by IBSA joint statement at the mentioned UN DESA open consultations. As my elaborate note on the history of CIRP indicates, and further supported by your emial, it is rather unfortunate that guys like you would completely ignore voices, documents, statements and propositions from South till something really strikes with force and concreteness as CIRP did, and then blame it for striking with force, and taking you by 'complete surprise'. What can 'the global South' do about it. Such is the construction of the dominant discourse, and in general, power, globally. > And it calls into question the degree to which the Rio conference agreed on the proposal, The three government reps developed Rio recommendations (which is different from CIRP proposal, but a kind of forerunner to it), among themselves at Rio, at a closed door meeting. No one other than government reps were at that meeting which took place immediately after the open workshop . This has been made clear several times, although there was a mistake whereby the paper was titled initially as if it came from the multistakeholder workshop itself. This was corrected and clarified immediately. > indicating instead that Parminder found it easier to gain the assent of a few governmental officials behind the scenes, than to get broad, democratic support from civil society, the IGF, or other stakeholders. We work both with open discursive processes (does IGC need to be told about it) and work with government officials when needed to advance our advocacy goals. All advocacy groups do it. As for broad democratic support, and your impressions from Indian groups you mention below, I am sure you would once again have completely ignored the support that we built among Southern civil society actors just over 10 days or so before the May special meeting on enhanced cooperation. Although you seem to have firmly decided that our position has no wide support in the South you may still want to see the joint civil society statement and its list of supporters which include some of the most important Southern civil society networks, India's top consumer groups, gender activists, those involved in access to information movement, farmer groups, those working on right to health, right to education, right to information, right to food etc. So, I really do not know what your definition of 'broad, democratic civil society support' for the South or otherwise, is. Well, I normally would desist form discussing this issue, but it is difficult to do more in showing the support, which obviously is there among the civil society sector in the South, when IT for Change has simply no IG funding for more than 2 years now, and we have no core support either. But we know of the support this issue has among the networks of civil society actors that we work with. I can assure you, we make no position that we would not be able to get the support for among these very wide set of networks. > > It is also interesting how quickly Indian ministers, not to mention Brazil and So. Africa., backed down when the proposal was challenged. Since it wasn't their idea, they were unable to defend it. CIRP remains India's official position. although there is a lot of drama and concerted effort, especially by the US IT industry based in India, to subvert this position. No one has backed down. Your information is wrong. > > A lot of things can be attributed to the power of industry and the U.S., but the lack of support for CIRP is not one of them. There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in Internet governance. See the joint civil society statement above. Also see the joint statement of Special Rapporteurs on Freedom of Expression and Special Rapporteur on Cultural Rights made on the eve of CSTD's special meeting on enhanced cooperation held in may 2011, which inter alia noted "the demand expressed by some civil society organizations for a democratization of the global governance of the Internet" (the same joint CS statement referred above). Would you tell me what is your indicator of 'popular support'. > My understanding from various civil society organizations I have met from India is that the CIRP proposal was not popular there, either. That just the people and groups you meet. The structural problems I see with how much of IG civil society is constructed has often been discussed by me on this list and elsewhere. That is unfortunate, but that does not hat what is really popular or not. There are other groups with much deeper connections with people and communities (and not just with the US enamoured anti-political upper middle class) who also, unlike waht you may suspect and must the biting your tongue to propose, have very well developed capacities of structural analysis and understanding of social phenomenon. > It is all in keeping with my general take on Parminder's ideas, which seek to replay 1970s-era battles between U.S. hegemony and third world sovereignty, with sovereign nation-states being confused with "democracy," at a time when sovereignty is either irrelevant to, or a regressive overlay on, global Internet governance. You are back to propoganda, trying to box me where you find most convenient to have me boxed. The fact is that I simply do not care much about state centric conceptions of sovereignty. I only support sovereignty of people, which is what democracy is. And I dont confuse democracy at all, I very well understand what democracy is, and often have discussed it here. like I recently did by positing version 1, 2 and 3 of participative democracy, the version three being where participator spaces are themselves institutionalised, largely independent of executive and legislative spaces, and where I would like to put institutions like IGF ideally to be. Therefore my ideas about politics and democracy are quite forward looking and keeping with them. However, while we are at the subject, I ust say that I have noted with great regret, over the years that I have known you, that what I thought once was a fine supporter of democracy and rule of law, even of a somewhat extreme right wing variety, is increasingly confused about democracy, especially with regard to global issues, resources and spaces. I have not been able to get from you what you think is the way democratic rule of law can be developed and maintained vis a vis the global Internet despite directly questioning you directly about it. I mean, what practical steps you would have taken next to ensure that for instance any global 'principles for Internet policy' are indeed arrived at democratically and not by OECD countries as it has been at present, and now they are looking to getting on with imposing it on others. What would you be thinking, if the locational lens helps, though it should not be needed for a real democrat, of all this if you were indeed a prof of internet governance in a Southern city? Can you give an honest answer to this simple question. > > As for the assertion that the CIRP proposal had nothing to do with ICANN, it is all on record, it called for domain name registration taxes to fund the thing and contained a statement that it would "coordinate and oversee the bodies responsible for technical and operational functioning of the Internet, including global standards setting." It is not it has nothing to do with ICANN. It is nothing to do with dislocating the current technical and operational functions of ICANN, Tunis Agenda being also clear about it. It has something to do with the small and focussed 'oversight' function that US gov does. However still CIRP is 5/6th about broader global public policy issues (and hence also its name) and only maybe 1/6th about exploring how US's oversight role can be replaced by a more international one. IT for Change's own stand, as would be clear to the documents linked above and the paper on 'dev agenda in IG', is that the CIR/ ICANN focus that some people put on the enhanced cooperation process is very unfortunate. We think that non CIR/ ICANN issues are by far more important. We also think, as stated in our recent statement to CSTD , that it will be best if CIRP divest itself of the proposed oversight role, and this is done through another mechanism. Whether revenues collected from DNS operation is to be used for CIRP's functions is a different issue. The problem is, one of the main ways any new mechanism at UN is resisted is by saying, well there is no money. This is a devious game of minimizing global governance when we are getting so global otherwise. WIPO is subtantially funded by international patent registration fees. No reason global governance of Internet may not be funded by revenues from DNS operation. There is an EU document that discusses whether and how excess ICANN funds can be employed for various public interest activities. At WG o IGF improvements we suggested that one of these could be to fund the IGF. That wont make IGF taking control of ICANN, would it. parminder > > An accurate description and analysis of the CIRP proposal can be found here. http://www.internetgovernance.org/2011/10/29/a-united-nations-committee-for-internet-related-policies-a-fair-assessment/ > > Milton L. Mueller > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies > Internet Governance Project > http://blog.internetgovernance.org > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- >> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of McTim >> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM >> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; parminder >> Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the >> Internet Economy >> >> Parminder, >> >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder >> wrote: >> >> >>> Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with regard to the >>> active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy >>> principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at democratising global >>> Internet policy making. >> My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy principles, >> rather an effort >> to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). >> >> It's clear we see the world differently. >> >> -- >> 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sat Oct 27 11:13:36 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 20:43:36 +0530 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> On Saturday 27 October 2012 06:39 AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote: > So governments are the only legitimate stakeholders in Internet > governance? I always have a problem with considering governments as stakeholders ( which kind of proposition is one of the principal democratic defect in MS theory). Yes, they are inadequately representative, some more inadequately than others, and some hardly representative at all. But that is the measure and scale I see governments on, and that is the democratic problem to address; how to improve, and if necessary, complement their representativity. On the other hand, if I begin to consider government, say my government, as one stakeholder, whereby I as a part of some other group would be another stakeholder, I am on a very problematic ground. I have admitted that 'my government' (defined as the government of the political entity which I can be considered to primarily belong) is, even normatively, expected to have 'its own' interests, other that of its constituents like me. And that having such 'own interests', whatever it means, is in quite fine, theoretically. To that extent I have regressed on, or in fact lost, the 'representativity' problematisation stated above. > I don't think you can just wave away the practical problems with this > - the democratic deficits in all intergovernmental bodies, and the > fact that there are transnational (border-crossing) interests that > governments have no democratic mandate to take into account - so even > in theory, they are not adequate representatives of the public interest. These are regular and well known problems with democracy, attempted to be addressed by deepening democracy. There is a great amount of literature and developing sets of practices within the arena of democracy in this regard. The solution to these problems was never seen to require bringing big business along to become equivalent stakeholders as governments and others. This is an illegitimate innovation of MSism in IG. parminder > > -- > > *Dr Jeremy Malcolm > Senior Policy Officer > Consumers International | the global campaigning voice for consumers* > 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 > > *Your rights, our mission – download CI's Strategy 2015:* > http://consint.info/RightsMission > > @Consumers_Int | www.consumersinternational.org > | > www.facebook.com/consumersinternational > > > Read our email confidentiality notice > . Don't > print this email unless necessary. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Sat Oct 27 14:13:57 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 14:13:57 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:13 AM, parminder wrote: > [snip] > On the other hand, if I begin to consider government, say my government, > as one stakeholder, whereby I as a part of some other group would be > another stakeholder, I am on a very problematic ground. I have admitted > that 'my government' (defined as the government of the political entity > which I can be considered to primarily belong) is, even normatively, > expected to have 'its own' interests, other that of its constituents like > me. And that having such 'own interests', whatever it means, is in quite > fine, theoretically. To that extent I have regressed on, or in fact lost, > the 'representativity' problematisation stated above. > All of what you say here is true: finding a democratically elected government that must - to be legitimate - represent ALL of its people to be but ONE "stakeholder" is deeply problematic for the way it downgrades the actual and potential power of democracy so that it is less powerful than business interests alone, much less business interests plus some individual civil society groups should they happen to band together on one issue or another. Even more stunning is Milton Mueller's comment that business support ALONE (or business with civil society) would constitute "popular support" for a given proposal. Milton's absolutely stunning admission, in the context of multi-stakeholder governance systems, means that democratically elected governmental officials do NOT represent anything in particular, and that business support alone is proof of popular support (and thus presumably obtains the mantle of democracy via this popular appeal and support). Under Milton's test, business support alone would not only trump we the people, it would constitute the proof that popular support in fact rested with the business' proposal, regardless of what democratically-inclined actors might say. And indeed, regardless of the specific facts here, consistent with this approach Parminder has taken a democratically-inclined approach in general contrast to a business-style approach, and Milton has specifically found Parminder's support to be essentially non-existent even though surely it is not, and further stated that there is "no popular support" whatsoever for UN involvement with internet governance even though that is likely true only of business actors who fear regulation and not of people generally (even if the numbers be small, they would not constitute zero or "no popular support.") Just as MS governance does, Milton discounts democratic support heavily (such as by characterizing Parminder), inflates the importance of business support (it alone would constitute "popular support), and also discounts civil society support, because only "*BUSINESS AND* civil society" support would constitute "popular support" in Milton Mueller's assessment. So, if business doesn't support it, it basically doesn't exist as "popular support" and thus would have to be disregarded every time popular support is required for governance. Consequently, within a MS framework and apparently even without a MS framework,* for Milton Mueller the only opinions that matter are those of business, *because without business support, civil society support alone simply can not constitute "popular support". Thus, whether civil society or legitimately elected democratic representatives, anyone honestly attempting to represent popular support or public opinion does not matter unless they can obtain business support for their positions. Talk about turning democracy and popular support upside down and on its head. Paul Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Sat Oct 27 06:18:40 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2012 13:18:40 +0300 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> Message-ID: <508BB500.1080609@gmail.com> Representative fora are essentially zero sum games (my time taken for representation undermines others speaking time or what have you), which is not to say they do not have a role to play in generating legitimacy, dialogue and consultation... but these are distinct from deliberative fora wherein reason/power/argument/evidence etc are used to get at a decision... methinks that one of the issues is that representivity is conflated with deliberation... On 2012/10/27 12:59 PM, Baudouin Schombe wrote: > Let us agree in the different approaches: > -the multi-stakeholder approach is the formula that has been and is > regularly required in almost all processes of representation or decision; > -if we consider the democratic dimension of the multi-stakeholder > approach, it is necessary to define a procedure for every country, > every community or different actors involved in the topic or issue; > -when we accept and agree to the procedure, there is of course in > terms of lobbyist becomes legislator it will also set the rules and > the profile of the person or persons need. > > Baudouin > > 2012/10/26 Norbert Klein > > > On 10/24/2012 9:12 AM, Paul Lehto wrote: >> The subject line says it most succinctly: In Multistakeholderism, >> those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else >> has a vote. >> >> In a democracy, it is a scandal that lobbyists have so much >> influence that they even write the drafts of laws. But in >> multistakeholder situations they take that scandal to a whole new >> level: those who would be lobbyists in a democracy >> (corporations, experts, civil society) become the legislators >> themselves, > > No. > > There is not only ONE stakeholder who becomes THE legislator - but > there are MULTI stakeholders. In the absence and impossibility of > taking universal votes on IG issues, I am not surprised about - > and I share - the opinion of many that multi-stakeholder systems > are the most practical ones that avoid that ONE stakeholder > decides everything, and gives many opinions access to public > discussion, even while decisions are organized not as a result of > a vote in a multi-stakeholder forum. > > Norbert Klein > Phnom Penh/Cambodia > >> and dispense with all public elections and not only write the >> laws but pass them, enforce them, and in some cases even set up >> courts of arbitration that are usually conditioned on waiving the >> right to go to the court system set up by democracies. >> >> A vote is just a minimum requirement of justice. Without a vote, >> law is just force inflicted by the wealthy and powerful. >> Multistakeholderism is a coup d'etat against democracy by those >> who would merely be lobbyists in a democratic system. So yes, I >> think it is misleading at best to use the word "democratic" in >> reference to multistakeholder systems. >> >> Paul R. Lehto, J.D. >> -- >> Paul R Lehto, J.D. >> P.O. Box 1 >> Ishpeming, MI 49849 >> lehto.paul at gmail.com >> 906-204-4965 (cell) >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > 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: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Sun Oct 28 00:02:54 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:32:54 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <508CAE6E.6070907@itforchange.net> On Friday 26 October 2012 06:52 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > > Paul > > “popular support” does not mean one person, or even two people. > > I mean a widespread mobilization among either civil society or > business or both, demanding greater UN involvement. > > You show me such a mobilization and I will eat those words. > Milton, In view of the relatively widespread mobilisation among civil society actors that I mentioned in my previous email for greater involvement of UN in Internet governance, that happened just over 10 days prior to the CSTD special meeting on enhanced cooperation in May 2011, are you now planning to eat your words. The concerned urls are http://www.itforchange.net/civil_society_statement_on_democratic_internet http://www.itforchange.net/list_of_signatories http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/ITfC/press%20release%20by%20UNspecial%20rapporteur.pdf parminder PS: Meanwhile I await your characterisation of the involved groups as..... > > *From:*Paul Lehto [mailto:lehto.paul at gmail.com] > *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:45 PM > *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller > *Subject:* Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue > on the Internet Economy > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:17 PM, Milton L Mueller > wrote: > > [snip] There just is no popular support for greater UN involvement in > Internet governance. > > > With the caveat that it be appropriately drafted and designed, I would > support greater UN involvement in Internet governance. In any case, at > minimum, it would appear that greater involvement by this listserv in > Internet governance might be fairly said to be greater UN > involvement. Is this problematic -- is there "no popular support" for > anything greater when it comes to the UN? > > "NO popular support" is a very strong statement, and as applied to > "greater UN involvement" it is not true since at least one person > expressing support would be more than "no" support, and I have done so > above. It would be easy to expand the number of counterexamples. > > This statement of "no popular support" appears to be a specific > example of at least exaggeration if not false claim regarding what > amounts to the mantle of democracy, since democracy is supposed to be > responsive to popular support and is somewhat interchangeable in this > context. > > I would be happy to allow Mr. Mueller the latitude to make what amount > in part to political arguments, but it seems that in the course of > this email I refer to below, a stricter policy in terms of how one > characterizes support or the lack thereof is being urged by Mr. > Mueller, so I think it's only fair to hold him to about the same > standard he urges for others. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > > Milton L. Mueller > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies > Internet Governance Project > http://blog.internetgovernance.org > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org > [mailto:governance- > > > request at lists.igcaucus.org ] > On Behalf Of McTim > > Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 12:12 PM > > To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > ; parminder > > Subject: Re: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation > Dialogue on the > > Internet Economy > > > > > Parminder, > > > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 3:44 AM, parminder > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone here have answers why they remain silent with > regard to the > > > active work of rich countries to develop 'global' Internet policy > > > principles, and react so rabidly to any effort at > democratising global > > > Internet policy making. > > > > My reaction is that CIRP was NOT an effort to make policy > principles, > > rather an effort > > to make IG LESS democratic (in a top-down gov only style). > > > > It's clear we see the world differently. > > > > -- > > 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.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 > > > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Sun Oct 28 14:26:30 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:26:30 -0200 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Dear all, I have already been approached (Oct.26) by the IGF secretariat regarding the indication of my name as a speaker for civil society in the IGF opening ceremony. This has not been decided yet by the secretariat as far as I know. *If* I am chosen, I reiterate my earlier message of expecting contributions from you all regarding what I should include in my 5-minute speech. I have received some significant contributions from a few people, especially Milton, and will try and post a draft before I fly to Baku (which will be early morning on Nov.01). fraternal regards --c.a. -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Sun Oct 28 15:58:38 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:58:38 +0100 Subject: [governance] and now for something completely different... Message-ID: <652E8AD1-5A25-4A2B-9EF5-5C0E8AD35FA7@uzh.ch> The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has some interesting thoughts on the WCIT and related Internet governance debates. Did you know that ETNO's proposal would favor Google and Facebook? That a big role for the ITU in IG would favor the USA? That Russia and China are at the forefront of opposing information warfare? That the US legally controls all domains and the NTIA can toss anyone out of the root and thus instantly cut them off? http://pd.cpim.org/2012/1028_pd/10282012_4.html A nice complement to some of the other analyses out there…. Bill *************************************************** William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland william.drake at uzh.ch www.williamdrake.org **************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Sun Oct 28 16:37:06 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:37:06 -0700 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <502E6686-2E4F-47A8-BA65-0FEA733D1148@virtualized.org> Paul, On Oct 26, 2012, at 12:52 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: > I believe the vast majority want "consistent worldwide laws" to not promulgate content they personally deem "socially damaging" and they most definitely do not want someone from "over there" (including the UN) to define what "socially damaging" means. > > I believe there are clearly some - a minority overall - that want that, and the intensity of their desire for it can make it seem like they are more like a majority. I guess our experiences differ. > Here again, you are giving an example of people taking positions that you don't like, and as a consequence dropping support for the political systems giving those people voice. Well, no, not really. I was merely observing that early in my career, I had certain preconceived notions and biases about what people who used the Internet actually wanted and that my experiences, particularly outside of the US and Western Europe, were eye opening. I try to no longer make assumptions about what people actually want. > Given a "constitutional" level discussion, what one usually sees happen is that people are willing to give up their desires in terms of what content they might wish to censor in order to keep the content they like free, and vice versa. I suppose I am a bit less optimistic than you. I have seen people, including those in the US and other 'liberal democracies', be quite insistent that particular content was non-negotiable due to national laws, cultural mores, religious sentiment, etc. > There is no intrinsic reason why the more powerful business interests should be permanently aligned with a free internet. Well, no reason other than self-interest. In an open market, those who desire more freedom in the services they obtain are free to 'vote with their feet'. It may not be coincidental that the governments that tend to be pushing greater control are the same governments that are more resistant to telecom/Internet market reforms. > The very same people that you see strongly pushing for content control at a governmental level can exert parallel control via boycotts and so forth to persuade an internet business to adopt parallel types of censorship. Certainly no business will understand why it must provide a forum or allow its resources to be utilized to criticize the business itself, and they will act to squash such criticism. Actually, at least historically, I believe the opposite has been true. Most large scale ISPs have fought quite strenuously to avoid being seen as in control of content that flows through their networks, desiring some form of "common carrier" status. > It's not a question of IF there will be worldwide government/governance, but a question of WHO will be the government/governors. The global nature of the structure of the internet guarantees that.Technical-level isolation such as countries sealing themselves off from the worldwide internet are attempts based on sovereignty concerns (even if misguided) to replace the complex of mostly business interests that rule the internet with the local dictatorship or democracy, as the case may be. Again, I am less optimistic. In a world governed by sovereign nation-states driven by their own self-interests (whether those interests are the dictator's or the people's), I fear the most likely stable end-state of "Internet governance" is an interconnection of independently mediated national networks, with each network having their own policies about what is acceptable use/content, blocking all other use/content. I personally feel the multi-stakeholder approach in which governments are just one of an array of interests is an attempt to balance the nation-state tendency to focus on national interests with other, more global interests (business, civil society, technical, etc). Regards, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Sun Oct 28 16:55:24 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 16:55:24 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <508BB500.1080609@gmail.com> References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BB500.1080609@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote: > [...] but these are distinct from deliberative fora wherein > reason/power/argument/evidence etc are used to get at a decision... > methinks that one of the issues is that representivity is conflated with > deliberation... > Normally, in governance fora that have democratic legitimacy, the lobbyists (business, experts, civil society) can and do provide excellent deliberation in the context of hearings, informal meetings, and advisory bodies, as well as other contexts. But as this thread is titled, these lobbyists become the legislators themselves in multistakeholder-style situations. By conflating the desire for deliberation with the issues of representation, the talking points for MS governance consist largely if not totally of the high-deliberation values provided by MS fora. But again, all of this deliberation and more can be had as an adjunct to a legitimately democratic system that does not also invest the non-representative lobbyists with all the power. So I agree that Riaz Tayob makes a good observation in this sense about conflating deliberation values with representation (and legitimacy). Nobody consciously dispenses with either value, but only the absence of representativity is fatal. Paul Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pouzin at well.com Sun Oct 28 20:59:33 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 01:59:33 +0100 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: Dear Carlos, FWIW. Louis - - - >From the WSIS preparation (2002) till now (2012) an enormous amount of intellectual exchanges has occurred among stakeholders. Understanding internet governance issues has progressed substantially. On the other hand no concrete evolution has taken place. US positions are dead set against any sharing of internet governance, and in the present context it is deemed to become ever more rigid and conflictual. The only forces able to bring about changes are governments initiatives to organize national governance on their part of the internet. However there does not appear much commonality in ways they are proceeding. To keep dialog going on, the IGF should change its ritual theme driven structure. Instead, governments should be invited to present their internet strategy along with predictable risks and benefits. - - - On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > Dear all, > > I have already been approached (Oct.26) by the IGF secretariat regarding > the indication of my name as a speaker for civil society in the IGF opening > ceremony. > > This has not been decided yet by the secretariat as far as I know. *If* I > am chosen, I reiterate my earlier message of expecting contributions from > you all regarding what I should include in my 5-minute speech. > > I have received some significant contributions from a few people, > especially Milton, and will try and post a draft before I fly to Baku > (which will be early morning on Nov.01). > > fraternal regards > > --c.a. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From baudouin.schombe at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 03:59:29 2012 From: baudouin.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin Schombe) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 08:59:29 +0100 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> Message-ID: Hello Thank you for the damage that such an approach presents. Milton arguments held in the socio-political reality in industrialized countries or economically very comptétitif globally. But this arguement problem in developing countries where there is not yet an effective framework for collaboration between public sector actors, the private sector, civil society ... This approach must relativize and contextualize it in the appropriate geographical area. *Baudouin* 2012/10/27 Paul Lehto > > > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:13 AM, parminder wrote: > >> [snip] >> >> On the other hand, if I begin to consider government, say my government, >> as one stakeholder, whereby I as a part of some other group would be >> another stakeholder, I am on a very problematic ground. I have admitted >> that 'my government' (defined as the government of the political entity >> which I can be considered to primarily belong) is, even normatively, >> expected to have 'its own' interests, other that of its constituents like >> me. And that having such 'own interests', whatever it means, is in quite >> fine, theoretically. To that extent I have regressed on, or in fact lost, >> the 'representativity' problematisation stated above. >> > > All of what you say here is true: finding a democratically elected > government that must - to be legitimate - represent ALL of its people to be > but ONE "stakeholder" is deeply problematic for the way it downgrades the > actual and potential power of democracy so that it is less powerful than > business interests alone, much less business interests plus some individual > civil society groups should they happen to band together on one issue or > another. > > Even more stunning is Milton Mueller's comment that business support ALONE > (or business with civil society) would constitute "popular support" for a > given proposal. > > Milton's absolutely stunning admission, in the context of > multi-stakeholder governance systems, means that democratically elected > governmental officials do NOT represent anything in particular, and that > business support alone is proof of popular support (and thus presumably > obtains the mantle of democracy via this popular appeal and support). > Under Milton's test, business support alone would not only trump we the > people, it would constitute the proof that popular support in fact rested > with the business' proposal, regardless of what democratically-inclined > actors might say. > > And indeed, regardless of the specific facts here, consistent with this > approach Parminder has taken a democratically-inclined approach in general > contrast to a business-style approach, and Milton has specifically found > Parminder's support to be essentially non-existent even though surely it is > not, and further stated that there is "no popular support" whatsoever for > UN involvement with internet governance even though that is likely true > only of business actors who fear regulation and not of people generally > (even if the numbers be small, they would not constitute zero or "no > popular support.") > > Just as MS governance does, Milton discounts democratic support heavily > (such as by characterizing Parminder), inflates the importance of business > support (it alone would constitute "popular support), and also discounts > civil society support, because only "*BUSINESS AND* civil society" > support would constitute "popular support" in Milton Mueller's assessment. > So, if business doesn't support it, it basically doesn't exist as "popular > support" and thus would have to be disregarded every time popular support > is required for governance. Consequently, within a MS framework and > apparently even without a MS framework,* for Milton Mueller the only > opinions that matter are those of business, *because without business > support, civil society support alone simply can not constitute "popular > support". Thus, whether civil society or legitimately elected democratic > representatives, anyone honestly attempting to represent popular support or > public opinion does not matter unless they can obtain business support for > their positions. > > Talk about turning democracy and popular support upside down and on its > head. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- 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: -------------- 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 From ocl at gih.com Mon Oct 29 04:08:59 2012 From: ocl at gih.com (Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 09:08:59 +0100 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <508E399B.2000101@gih.com> On 29/10/2012 01:59, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: > Dear Carlos, FWIW. > Louis > - - - > > From the WSIS preparation (2002) till now (2012) an enormous amount of > intellectual exchanges has occurred among stakeholders. Understanding > internet governance issues has progressed substantially. On the other > hand no concrete evolution has taken place. US positions are dead set > against any sharing of internet governance, and in the present context > it is deemed to become ever more rigid and conflictual. > > The only forces able to bring about changes are governments > initiatives to organize national governance on their part of the > internet. However there does not appear much commonality in ways they > are proceeding. To keep dialog going on, the IGF should change its > ritual theme driven structure. Instead, governments should be invited > to present their internet strategy along with predictable risks and > benefits. And thus I respectfully disagree. I disagree with top-down government initiatives to organize national governance on their part of the internet. The Internet has become the success it is today thanks to a multi-stakeholder bottom-up process. In-line with this development, many local IGF initiatives were born out of a bottom-up process with the government being only one of the participants, often having nothing to do with the actual organization of the local IGF. I completely understand your point of view. I have another one that is diametrically opposed. This, in effect is the crux of the question Internet governance is faced with today: top-down or bottom-up? Kind regards, Olivier -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Oct 29 04:27:42 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:57:42 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITRs Message-ID: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> Hi All IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it here as well. parminder (begins) We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as follows: /1. State control over Internet routing system/ This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. /2. ITU and CIRs management/ One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their territories for the sake of international communication'. If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of thinking and discussion among us. In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is telecom and which not. While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - or even more specific things like open peering and the such. I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and it should be opposed. /5. Some sundry issues /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to be included. (ends) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From riaz.tayob at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 05:54:27 2012 From: riaz.tayob at gmail.com (Riaz K Tayob) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:54:27 +0100 Subject: [governance] and now for something completely different... In-Reply-To: <652E8AD1-5A25-4A2B-9EF5-5C0E8AD35FA7@uzh.ch> References: <652E8AD1-5A25-4A2B-9EF5-5C0E8AD35FA7@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <508E5253.6020809@gmail.com> Thanks Bill... but I think the ignoble award of all time goes to the single rooters... anything else just pales.... On 2012/10/28 08:58 PM, William Drake wrote: > The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has some interesting thoughts > on the WCIT and related Internet governance debates. Did you know > that ETNO's proposal would favor Google and Facebook? That a big role > for the ITU in IG would favor the USA? That Russia and China are at > the forefront of opposing information warfare? That the US legally > controls all domains and the NTIA can toss anyone out of the root and > thus instantly cut them off? > > http://pd.cpim.org/2012/1028_pd/10282012_4.html > > A nice complement to some of the other analyses out there…. > > Bill > > > > > > > *************************************************** > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > william.drake at uzh.ch > www.williamdrake.org > **************************************************** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Oct 29 06:26:25 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:56:25 +0530 Subject: [governance] and now for something completely different... Message-ID: Sorry? Let a thousand flowers bloom and a thousand alt roots flourish? --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Riaz K Tayob" To: , "William Drake" Subject: [governance] and now for something completely different... Date: Mon, Oct 29, 2012 3:24 PM Thanks Bill... but I think the ignoble award of all time goes to the single rooters... anything else just pales.... On 2012/10/28 08:58 PM, William Drake wrote: > The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has some interesting thoughts > on the WCIT and related Internet governance debates. Did you know > that ETNO's proposal would favor Google and Facebook? That a big role > for the ITU in IG would favor the USA? That Russia and China are at > the forefront of opposing information warfare? That the US legally > controls all domains and the NTIA can toss anyone out of the root and > thus instantly cut them off? > > http://pd.cpim.org/2012/1028_pd/10282012_4.html > > A nice complement to some of the other analyses out there…. > > Bill > > > > > > > *************************************************** > William J. Drake > International Fellow & Lecturer > Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ > University of Zurich, Switzerland > william.drake at uzh.ch > www.williamdrake.org > **************************************************** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Mon Oct 29 07:48:25 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 09:48:25 -0200 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. fraternal regards --c.a. On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: > Hi All > > IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs > draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the > following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR > discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was > also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it > here as well. parminder > > (begins) > > We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as > follows: > > /1. State control over Internet routing system/ > > This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, > even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared > that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to > develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which > today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these > countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. > Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is > significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled > Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to > nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. > > In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which > deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which > routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to > 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go > with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 > altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. > > /2. ITU and CIRs management/ > > One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide > the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the > distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the > current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's > feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options > in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, > numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' > and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to > 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and > identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation > states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their > territories for the sake of international communication'. > > If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and > numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on > ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific > ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied > individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which > means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that > ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This > becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make > ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should > speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially > affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. > > /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ > > Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is > really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and > ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory > system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has > developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just > argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be > excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - > what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based > convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony > disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new > definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory > systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. > > We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking > complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for > instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ > definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet > not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not > subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly > rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same > time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the > ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. > This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet > under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What > does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and > receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's > role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) > > This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our > tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / > infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication > (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same > time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. > Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most > important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of > thinking and discussion among us. > > In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' > would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we > may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a > lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. The Internet is *composed* of layers, not *divided into* layers. This is crucial. If the telcos take over transport and routing, its consequences propagate to the upper layers, negatively affecting content providers, local Internet service providers, and above all the final users -- it will certainly be another kind of Internet. > > /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet > > /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' > arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is > recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality > cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of > normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an > issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there > is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of > enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and > general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net > neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above > mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is > telecom and which not. > > While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons > one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender > pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to > promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - > or even more specific things like open peering and the such. > > I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which > can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and > it should be opposed. In Brazil the Ministry of Communications works in partnership with the telcos to remove the net neutrality concept from the Civil Framework for the Internet currently submitted to Congress. This is seen as part of the "freedom package" telcos are trying to push along the lines of "sender party pays" and the freedom to meddle with (and arbitrarily charge for) packet traffic. > > /5. Some sundry issues > > /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require > separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether > ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. > These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I > think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if > the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain > 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating > agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and > diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to > be included. > > (ends) > > frt rgds --c.a. -------------- 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 From pwilson at apnic.net Mon Oct 29 09:10:56 2012 From: pwilson at apnic.net (Paul Wilson) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:10:56 +1000 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. Paul. On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. > > fraternal regards > > --c.a. > > On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >> Hi All >> >> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >> here as well. parminder >> >> (begins) >> >> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >> follows: >> >> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >> >> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >> >> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. > > Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. > >> >> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >> >> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >> territories for the sake of international communication'. >> >> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. > > I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. > >> >> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >> >> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >> >> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >> >> This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our >> tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / >> infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication >> (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same >> time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. >> Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most >> important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of >> thinking and discussion among us. >> >> In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' >> would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we >> may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a >> lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. > > The Internet is *composed* of layers, not *divided into* layers. This is crucial. If the telcos take over transport and routing, its consequences propagate to the upper layers, negatively affecting content providers, local Internet service providers, and above all the final users -- it will certainly be another kind of Internet. > >> >> /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet >> >> /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' >> arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is >> recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality >> cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of >> normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an >> issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there >> is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of >> enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and >> general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net >> neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above >> mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is >> telecom and which not. >> >> While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons >> one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender >> pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to >> promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - >> or even more specific things like open peering and the such. >> >> I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which >> can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and >> it should be opposed. > > In Brazil the Ministry of Communications works in partnership with the telcos to remove the net neutrality concept from the Civil Framework for the Internet currently submitted to Congress. This is seen as part of the "freedom package" telcos are trying to push along the lines of "sender party pays" and the freedom to meddle with (and arbitrarily charge for) packet traffic. > >> >> /5. Some sundry issues >> >> /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require >> separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether >> ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. >> These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I >> think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if >> the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain >> 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating >> agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and >> diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to >> be included. >> >> (ends) >> >> > > frt rgds > > --c.a. > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Oct 29 09:20:38 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:20:38 +0000 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2275764@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto Even more stunning is Milton Mueller's comment that business support ALONE (or business with civil society) would constitute "popular support" for a given proposal. Ø I have no idea what you are talking about, and I frankly doubt anyone else does, either. Try providing an exact quote. Milton's absolutely stunning admission, in the context of multi-stakeholder governance systems, means that democratically elected governmental officials do NOT represent anything in particular, and that business support alone is proof of popular support (and thus presumably obtains the mantle of democracy via this popular appeal and support). Under Milton's test, Ø You seem not to have noticed that none of the governmental officials involved in ICANN, GAC, etc are "democratically elected." They are at best political appointees (e.g., Strickling), and for the most part career bureaucrats (e.g., GAC reps). Parliamentarians are conspicuously absent. And of course once you include Parliamentarians or elected representatives it would also mean that the positions taken by governments would be as diverse and pluralistic as those of civil society. If governmental positions in international institutions did indeed reflect this pluralism and diversity my view of them would change. As long as you advocate the unitary state, I do insist that governments do not represent "democracy" Ø You also have lost sight of the fact that it is government officials who respond to (big) business lobbyists most strongly. This is evident to those of us who actually attend and participate in international institutions. You will find that out, if you ever get some real experience to go along with your prolix writing. So, if business doesn't support it, it basically doesn't exist as "popular support" and thus would have to be disregarded every time popular support is required for governance. Consequently, within a MS framework and apparently even without a MS framework, for Milton Mueller the only opinions that matter are those of business, because without business support Ø A complete fabrication. You are hallucinating. Yes, in assessing popular support business (which is _not_ a uniform, homogeneous group) counts, but no one has ever said that those opinions are the only ones that matter. Ø And yes, if you have a coalition of civil society and business against the state, then you are much more likely to succeed politically. That is just a fact, borne out empirically in cases ranging from SOPA/PIPA to net neutrality to the encryption battles of the early 1990s. Ø My point relative to Parminder was simply that there is preponderance of business OR civil society support for CIRP. Still haven't seen any evidence to the contrary. civil society support alone simply can not constitute "popular support". Ø Hallucinating again. Ø Civil society and private business are not as dichotomous as you seem to believe. But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that something was supported by 60-80% of individuals and civil society organizations and OPPOSED by most businesses. To me, this would indeed constitute evidence of popular support. Ø But to repeat, there is no evidence that CIRP has such support. And that is what we are discussing. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 10:03:36 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:03:36 -0400 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: Hi Louis, On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: > Dear Carlos, FWIW. > Louis > - - - > > From the WSIS preparation (2002) till now (2012) an enormous amount of > intellectual exchanges has occurred among stakeholders. Understanding > internet governance issues has progressed substantially. On the other hand > no concrete evolution has taken place. In addition to agreeing with Olivier, do you deny that the transition from a MoU to the AoC is evolutionary? -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 10:15:44 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 10:15:44 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: > > If one asks "should the UN control the Internet" the vast majority would say > no. > > But if one asks a more specific question, (others could surely phrase a > better example here) like "Do you support a free, open internet with > consistent worldwide laws and rules instead of a patchwork, fragmented > internet?" This is what we had BEFORE governments started getting involved in IG (but we didn't call them laws). -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From pouzin at well.com Mon Oct 29 10:24:59 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:24:59 +0100 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: *Comments on comments Cheers. Louis *- - - On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 12:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. > > fraternal regards > > --c.a. > > > On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: > >> Hi All >> >> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >> here as well. parminder >> >> (begins) >> >> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >> follows: >> >> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >> >> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >> >> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >> > > Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries > independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will > continue to happen. > *AFAIK this is an old practice. E.g. some mid-east countries don't want their phone calls routed through Israel. That sounds quite legitimate for security reasons. However it may be more complex to implement in IP nets than in POTS.* > > >> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >> >> >> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >> territories for the sake of international communication'. >> >> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >> > > I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers > management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems > in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased > towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and > should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling > into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have > to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist > internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new > CEO, Fadi Chéadé. > *Google, Facebook and Twitter also have names and numbers for identifying their resources. Logically the only essential telecom resources are IP addresses and phone numbers (E.164, E.212, E.214, etc.). DNS and all nicknaming schemes are applications that should be optional for users. As we know DNS was captured and diverted into a required cash cow system for the benefit of some private interests. So be it. But it would be really goofy to make it a model for the future. Other naming schemes will be necessary, e.g. for the so called "internet of things", for which the DNS is wholly inadequate. Separating clearly infrastructure identifiers (IP addresses and other existing numbers) from application identifiers allows customized applications to develop at their own pace, independent from the infrastructure. Decoupling layers is a fundamental design concept in network architecture.* >> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >> >> >> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >> > *There is no internet definition in a technical world. What makes sense in ITRs are the services offered to users, and the constraints placed on Operating Agencies. These two facets should result from negotiation (or diktat) between stakeholders (governments, telecom, business users, civil society*,* maybe others in some countries). Regulation, if any, tends to be messy when it straddles technical layers boundaries because it then depends on specific network implementations. * > * >> *We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ definitional >> logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet not as a >> telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >> > *As said above, the term "internet" has no technical meaning. Which services do they want to regulate ? Datagram transport ? UDP or TCP or FTP ? Email ? DNS ?* *routing ?* > >> This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our >> tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / >> infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication >> (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same >> time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. >> Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most >> important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of >> thinking and discussion among us. >> >> In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' >> would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we >> may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a >> lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. >> > *Yeah. What security ? Passwords ? Encryption ? Authentication ? Anonymity ? DDOS ? Mass surveillance system ? etc.* > > The Internet is *composed* of layers, not *divided into* layers. This is > crucial. If the telcos take over transport and routing, its consequences > propagate to the upper layers, negatively affecting content providers, > local Internet service providers, and above all the final users -- it will > certainly be another kind of Internet. > > >> /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet >> >> /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' >> >> arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is >> recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality >> cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of >> normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an >> issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there >> is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of >> enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and >> general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net >> neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above >> mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is >> telecom and which not. >> >> While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons >> one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender >> pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to >> promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - >> or even more specific things like open peering and the such. >> >> I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which >> can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and >> it should be opposed. >> > > In Brazil the Ministry of Communications works in partnership with the > telcos to remove the net neutrality concept from the Civil Framework for > the Internet currently submitted to Congress. This is seen as part of the > "freedom package" telcos are trying to push along the lines of "sender > party pays" and the freedom to meddle with (and arbitrarily charge for) > packet traffic. > *Is there a definition of neutrality that can be measured ? * > > >> /5. Some sundry issues >> >> /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require >> >> separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether >> ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. >> These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I >> think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if >> the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain >> 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating >> agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and >> diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to >> be included. >> >> (ends) >> >> >> > frt rgds > > --c.a. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 11:42:10 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 11:42:10 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2275764@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2275764@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto: > governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Paul Lehto > > **** > > Even more stunning is Milton Mueller's comment that business support ALONE > (or business with civil society) would constitute "popular support" for a > given proposal. **** > > ** ** > > **Ø **I have no idea what you are talking about, and I frankly doubt > anyone else does, either. Try providing an exact quote. > Milton, I quoted your own language about 3 days ago, and you replied back then without greatly modifying your comments. Please read carefully the exact quote already provided for you three days ago, and the first paragraph of my response back then, which was at the top of my email that day: On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > Paul > > “popular support” does not mean one person, or even two people. > > I mean a widespread mobilization among *either civil society or business > or both*, demanding greater UN involvement. > > [emphasis in bold added] > Paul Lehto reply to above, Fri Oct 26, 2012: "I can't believe that you would count a "widespread mobilization" *among business alone* (or business and "civil society") as meeting the definition of "popular support." From the perspective of democracy (which counts only human beings as having a vote, not businesses) your honesty here is almost mind-blowing. ------------------- It is clear that on Friday October 26, 2012 Milton provided a definition of "popular support" in order to explain the scope of things that would have "no popular support" and thus are unworthy of passage or significant consideration. That definition of "popular support" clearly states that a mobilization of business (alone) meets the definition of "popular support" for Milton. > **** > > > > **Ø **You seem not to have noticed that none of the governmental > officials involved in ICANN, GAC, etc are "democratically elected." They > are at best political appointees (e.g., Strickling), and for the most part > career bureaucrats (e.g., GAC reps). Parliamentarians are conspicuously > absent. [...] > I have not lost sight of this. It has been discussed somewhat extensively recently by me and others as the demotion of democratically elected representatives to being just one of many different "stakeholders." Clearly, I recognize that some of these officials are involved. Though many are appointees, the critical link for democratic legitimacy is that the appointee be appointed by, and given operational standards by, someone who is democratically elected/accountable. This preserves a link of control by the people. Even if this link of control is sometimes tenuous in practical terms, it nevertheless exists whereas other stakeholders are completely unaccountable to the people and there is no mechanism for recourse or recall or change of policy even if that policy has "no popular support" and very much against the public interest. **** > > **Ø **You also have lost sight of the fact that it is government > officials who respond to (big) business lobbyists most strongly. This is > evident to those of us who actually attend and participate in international > institutions. You will find that out, if you ever get some real experience > to go along with your prolix writing. > I quite agree regarding too much business control but ironically you recognize that as valid in your definition of "popular support" and amplify it in support of MS governance systems that institutionalize such control. If big business lobbyists are a problem corrupting democracy, why institutionalize that control by giving business affirmative votes, making lobbying interests into major voting interests (while still not prohibiting them from lobbying other non-business "stakeholders"? As far as "prolix writing" being my only experience, that's an ironic and probably ad hominem attack coming from a professor such as you. I've worked for a state senator in the legislature, a US Senator's field office, been an elected lawmaker regarding court rules, and had over a dozen years of business litigation experience prior to becoming more prolix and scholarly, like many law professors. > **** > > ** ** > > * for Milton Mueller the only opinions that matter are those of business, > *because without business support > > ** ** > > **Ø **A complete fabrication. You are hallucinating. Yes, in assessing > popular support business (which is _*not*_ a uniform, homogeneous group) > counts, but no one has ever said that those opinions are the only ones that > matter. > I am correct in stating that business support alone meets your definition of "popular support" since you stated on October 26 that by "popular support" "I mean a widespread mobilization among *either civil society or business or both" Thus, business support alone constitutes "popular support" if it is mobilized. I overstated a more minor element of your case, and for this I apologize and retract what I said. I stated that civil society support, alone, could not constitute "popular support" without business support. On a closer examination of your words, a "widespread mobilization" of civil society might well meet your definition without business mobilization. That being said, the most important part of what you said is that business mobilization, with OR WITHOUT civil society, constitutes popular support. And that is still quite stunning, as stated before. * > ** ** > > Ø And yes, if you have a coalition of civil society and business against > the state, then you are much more likely to succeed politically. That is > just a fact, borne out empirically in cases ranging from SOPA/PIPA to net > neutrality to the encryption battles of the early 1990s. > This is true, for practical politics, But we are talking here not of chances of passing proposals, but of what in fact constitutes popular support. And you have stated that business support with or without civil society support is popular support, i.e. the voice of the people, basically. > **** > > **Ø **Civil society and private business are not as dichotomous as you > seem to believe. But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that > something was supported by 60-80% of individuals and civil society > organizations and OPPOSED by most businesses. To me, this would indeed > constitute evidence of popular support. > Milton, you ask us to ASSUME 60 to 80% support of "individuals and civil society" and opposition by "most businesses." Because your example is hypothetical, the facts are not in doubt, and so both the people (individuals) and civil society both really do have supermajority support of 60 to 80%, and on top of this even a few businesses support it as well, even though "most businesses" oppose it. Despite commanding super-majority popular support, and despite the facts not being subject to debate because you require us to assume them, you only declare clear supermajority support by both the people and civil society to be "evidence" of popular support. It is far more than mere evidence, it IS popular support. Period. You asked us to assume it, so there's no room to debate that. You posit a "widespread mobilization" at 60 to 80%, yet this is diminished as mere "evidence" of popular support. Yet, in your original definition, a widespread mobilization by business alone would be more than "evidence" of popular support, it IS popular support. There is still an elevation of business in your popular support test, and a diminishment of individual and civil society support. > **** > > **Ø **But to repeat, there is no evidence that CIRP has such support. > And that is what we are discussing. **** > > ** > But you would only accept as "evidence" of popular support something like 60 to 80% support. In the real world one can literally always argue whether or not that standard is met because the facts are not assumed as in the example you gave. Thus, no proposal or group as a practical matter, can ever meet the standard of popular support for you provided you are, as with CIRP, inclined to look at it in a skeptical light. While one of my statements characterizing your position went a bit too far in terms of the implications of your original definition of "popular support", the underlying point that democracy is downgraded in MS governance to one mere stakeholder among many, and that you Milton personally further discount the weight of the people and civil society by both your original definition as well as your subsequent clarifications still applies. I don't understand why you would do this, and not back off when it's called out, if you share a great concern with the disproportionate control by business lobbyists of many democratic governance systems. Paul Lehto, J.D. > ** > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 11:54:19 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:24:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Are there even "laws" as far as the internet itself is concerned? (not talking about laws governments have created; I mean laws that form a legal foundation of the internet) - my assumption was that such a thing didnt exist.... Governments making laws yes but those laws are not the foundation of a free, open internet because in it's original, free, open form the internet is based around concept, understanding, achievement - not laws. Or am I wrong here? -C On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:45 PM, McTim wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: > > > > > > If one asks "should the UN control the Internet" the vast majority would > say > > no. > > > > But if one asks a more specific question, (others could surely phrase a > > better example here) like "Do you support a free, open internet with > > consistent worldwide laws and rules instead of a patchwork, fragmented > > internet?" > > This is what we had BEFORE governments started getting involved in IG > (but we didn't call them laws). > > -- > 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.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: -------------- 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 From mueller at syr.edu Mon Oct 29 11:58:42 2012 From: mueller at syr.edu (Milton L Mueller) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:58:42 +0000 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2275764@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22759CE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> So you take a statement of mine that notes an absence of mobilization from either business or civil society for CIRP, and you distort it into a claim that the only opinions that matter are those of business, dishonest, pointless to discuss further Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies Internet Governance Project http://blog.internetgovernance.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Oct 29 13:09:56 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:39:56 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> Message-ID: <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> Carlos and Paul, Thanks for your response. First of all, let me say that our, IT for Change's, real view on this matter is that new ITRs should have been a part of a larger look at how Internet works and what is necessary to be done in terms of its governance in public interest, more so from the viewpoint of those who are currently marginalised, whose interests we seek to espouse. This was, and is, necessary now, since Internet is no longer the 'interesting new thing' that it was 10-15 years ago. It is today a defining force shaping our societies, our social structures, and its power relationships. We at IT for Change, and our partner networks, are unable to satisfy ourselves that the way Internet has grown and shaped in the last few years is the best way for it to go, in terms of economic and social justice. It is increasingly causing a greater rather than lesser concentration of power, which trend is, in our view, not only possible to check, it is our collective duty to do so. Coming back to Internet governance, over the last few years we should have beendiscussing (rather than stalling such discussions) what part of the Internet needs what kind of governance - which is just, democratic, pluralistic etc. Not that we would have immediately come to the perfect solution, but we would have been closer to it, and, we would have have been closer to having a better understanding, perhaps even some degree of consensus, regarding what should go into the ITRs and what should not. Having a discussion on whether telecom regulators should have jurisdiction over transport aspects of the Internet or not 5 days before public comments into the ITU process closes is not the best way to be dealing with this issue. I do believe, for instance, that ITR amendments should have accompanied some kind of an agreement with everyone accepting the appropriateness and legitimacy of the current distributed system of DNS and technical standards management of the Internet, with perhaps a statement of a few general principles on the areas in which further evolutionary improvements need to be sought. The CIRs oversight issue needs to be resolved, at least discussed with all sincerity, at another level, and so also the issues of broader Internet related public policies, the mandate of OECD's CICCP and the proposed mandate of CIRP. All of this should be a kind of one package, because what we do in one place is linked to what is done or not done in another. Instead of taking such an holistic, and allow me to say, sincere, approach, what actually is sought be done is to treat ITR amendments as a kind of ugly emergency that needs to be given a fire-fighting response, and soon, when the fires are doused, we can be back to the merry neoliberal times of unbridled growth and shaping of the Internet in a manner that further entrenches existing power, without any kind of public interest oversight or intervention. Sorry for the lengthy disclaimer, but it was necessary for it to be stated to frame my response to the immediate issue at hand; whether any part of the Internet (meaning here the transport/ infrastructural) should to be within ITU's remit of not. For us, the basic question that we need to address here is; Is the availability a net neutral Internet to be considered just as a normal commercial service or good, subject to normal laws of commerce alone, or is it to be considered at a special level, as a guaranteed, universal service (which is free, subsidized etc when required), and whose qualities, like net neutrality, and other kinds, just have to be maintained, and if needed, will be enforced through a special dedicated system, as for instance telecom regulators do for telecom. How we proceed further depends on what response we give to this question. I know Milton's response to this question, but for others who think that Internet is not just like any other commercial good, and its basic availability and nature (net neutrality etc) has to be ensured, we then have to decide that either this is ensured by the existing telecom regulators, or we set up a new Internet regulatory authority. At this stage, we can make a distinction between the Internet as a basic infrastructure, which, I think requires the above protection, and its content and application layers where the barrier to entry, competition dynamics are 'normally' of a qualitatively different kind. This is why the content and applications layers should be kept out of the regulatory purview. And if indeed the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet needs to be regulated, now with increasing IP based convergence, since telecom regulator soon will have little non IP based infrastructure to regulate, it goes to reason that they regulate the transport layer of the Internet, which definitionally continues to be considered as telecom (which in fact as per existing definitions in the existing ITRs, and not only in ITRs but as per telecom statutes in most countries, is does indeed already count as telecom). For those who want ITU not to have remit over the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet, the question is; do they also want national level telecom regulators to not have anything to do with even with the transport part of the Internet. This would so much delight the telecom companies. In the US, they are fightingpreciselythis case against FCC's rulings on net neutrality, and I recently heard a guy from a telecom association in India mutter something to a similar effect. There will be no net neutrality without a regulator for the Internet's transport layer. I think this much is understood by all net neutrality supporters. And there will be no universal service obligations, cross subsidisation for under served regions etc. We have to indeed be careful about what we ask at the ITU's ITR discussions, because the chickens will soon come home to roost, at the national level, whereby we would have perhaps permanently compromised possibilities of public interest regulation over the transport layer of the Internet, including any possibility of ensuring net neutrality. US citizens perhaps have a vote between no net neutrality (elect Romney) or weak version of net neutrality, that doesnt extend to mobiles (re-elect Obama), but for the others less fortunate, international norms in this area are something that may be among the few positive hopes to clutch to. Getting Internet's transport layer out of the definition of telecom would basically set a norm that will soon travel downwards to the national levels, of course on the wings of the powerful multi national telecoms, to challenge the remit and authority of national telecom regulators to enforce any kind of net neutrality. parminder On Monday 29 October 2012 06:40 PM, Paul Wilson wrote: > Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. > > Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. > > In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. > > Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? > > On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. > > It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. > > I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. > > Paul. > > > On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > >> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. >> >> fraternal regards >> >> --c.a. >> >> On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >>> Hi All >>> >>> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >>> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >>> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >>> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >>> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >>> here as well. parminder >>> >>> (begins) >>> >>> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >>> follows: >>> >>> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >>> >>> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >>> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >>> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >>> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >>> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >>> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >>> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >>> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >>> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >>> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >>> >>> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >>> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >>> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >>> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >>> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >>> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >> Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. >> >>> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >>> >>> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >>> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >>> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >>> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >>> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >>> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >>> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >>> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >>> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >>> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >>> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >>> territories for the sake of international communication'. >>> >>> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >>> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >>> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >>> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >>> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >>> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >>> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >>> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >>> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >>> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >>> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >> I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. >> >>> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >>> >>> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >>> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >>> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >>> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >>> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >>> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >>> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >>> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >>> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >>> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >>> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >>> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >>> >>> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >>> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >>> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >>> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >>> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >>> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >>> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >>> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >>> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >>> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >>> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >>> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >>> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >>> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >>> >>> This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our >>> tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / >>> infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication >>> (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same >>> time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. >>> Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most >>> important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of >>> thinking and discussion among us. >>> >>> In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' >>> would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we >>> may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a >>> lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. >> The Internet is *composed* of layers, not *divided into* layers. This is crucial. If the telcos take over transport and routing, its consequences propagate to the upper layers, negatively affecting content providers, local Internet service providers, and above all the final users -- it will certainly be another kind of Internet. >> >>> /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet >>> >>> /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' >>> arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is >>> recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality >>> cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of >>> normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an >>> issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there >>> is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of >>> enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and >>> general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net >>> neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above >>> mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is >>> telecom and which not. >>> >>> While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons >>> one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender >>> pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to >>> promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - >>> or even more specific things like open peering and the such. >>> >>> I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which >>> can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and >>> it should be opposed. >> In Brazil the Ministry of Communications works in partnership with the telcos to remove the net neutrality concept from the Civil Framework for the Internet currently submitted to Congress. This is seen as part of the "freedom package" telcos are trying to push along the lines of "sender party pays" and the freedom to meddle with (and arbitrarily charge for) packet traffic. >> >>> /5. Some sundry issues >>> >>> /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require >>> separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether >>> ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. >>> These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I >>> think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if >>> the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain >>> 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating >>> agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and >>> diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to >>> be included. >>> >>> (ends) >>> >>> >> frt rgds >> >> --c.a. >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 > ________________________________________________________________________ > Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC > http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Mon Oct 29 13:33:09 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 23:03:09 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <508EBDD5.1060309@itforchange.net> On Monday 29 October 2012 10:39 PM, parminder wrote: > snip > US citizens perhaps have a vote between no net neutrality (elect > Romney) or weak version of net neutrality, that doesnt extend to > mobiles (re-elect Obama), but for the others less fortunate, > international norms in this area are something that may be among the > few positive hopes to clutch to. Getting Internet's transport layer > out of the definition of telecom would basically set a norm that will > soon travel downwards to the national levels, of course on the wings > of the powerful multi national telecoms, to challenge the remit and > authority of national telecom regulators to enforce any kind of net > neutrality. See the article below to know what kind of game this non regulation business is headed towards. While one of the principle victims of this game will be net neutrality, it is a tribute to the virtuosity with which the so very powerful play this game that with the ETNO strawman (a proposal that never had a chance) they have been successful to get even the net neutrality brigade on their side in the ITU-ITR saga, to seek exclusion of all aspects of the Internet from definition of telecom, something which, to repeat, will soon the principal weapon that will be used to fight net neutrality. Parminder 'Internet Freedom'? AT&T's Verbal Jujitsu to Close Down Telecommunications in America http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/internet-freedom-att_b_1869358.html .... AT&T has reached new heights of hubris with the letter they submitted to the FCC on August 30, 2012. AT&T's plan is to remove all regulations and obligations and they are doing this with a trick; the Internet is an 'information service' which does not have the obligations of a 'telecommunications' service -- and they are proposing to make everything regulated as the Internet. This means that almost all of the remaining wires, networks or even the obligation to offer services over those wires and networks are all removed -- as much of this infrastructure is classified as "telecommunications". The Public Switched Telephone Networks, the utility, would suddenly be reclassified as an information service. Sayonara any telco rules, regulations and oh yes, your rights. Your service breaks... tough. Prices go up and there's no direct competition -- too bad. Networks weren't upgraded -- so what. Net Neutrality? Neutered. > > parminder > > > On Monday 29 October 2012 06:40 PM, Paul Wilson wrote: >> Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. >> >> Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. >> >> In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. >> >> Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? >> >> On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. >> >> It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. >> >> I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. >> >> Paul. >> >> >> On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >> >>> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. >>> >>> fraternal regards >>> >>> --c.a. >>> >>> On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >>>> Hi All >>>> >>>> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >>>> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >>>> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >>>> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >>>> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >>>> here as well. parminder >>>> >>>> (begins) >>>> >>>> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >>>> follows: >>>> >>>> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >>>> >>>> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >>>> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >>>> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >>>> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >>>> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >>>> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >>>> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >>>> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >>>> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >>>> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >>>> >>>> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >>>> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >>>> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >>>> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >>>> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >>>> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >>> Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. >>> >>>> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >>>> >>>> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >>>> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >>>> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >>>> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >>>> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >>>> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >>>> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >>>> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >>>> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >>>> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >>>> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >>>> territories for the sake of international communication'. >>>> >>>> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >>>> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >>>> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >>>> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >>>> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >>>> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >>>> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >>>> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >>>> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >>>> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >>>> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >>> I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. >>> >>>> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >>>> >>>> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >>>> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >>>> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >>>> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >>>> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >>>> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >>>> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >>>> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >>>> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >>>> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >>>> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >>>> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >>>> >>>> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >>>> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >>>> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >>>> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >>>> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >>>> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >>>> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >>>> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >>>> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >>>> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >>>> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >>>> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >>>> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >>>> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >>>> >>>> This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our >>>> tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / >>>> infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication >>>> (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same >>>> time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. >>>> Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most >>>> important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of >>>> thinking and discussion among us. >>>> >>>> In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' >>>> would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we >>>> may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a >>>> lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. >>> The Internet is *composed* of layers, not *divided into* layers. This is crucial. If the telcos take over transport and routing, its consequences propagate to the upper layers, negatively affecting content providers, local Internet service providers, and above all the final users -- it will certainly be another kind of Internet. >>> >>>> /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet >>>> >>>> /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' >>>> arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is >>>> recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality >>>> cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of >>>> normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an >>>> issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there >>>> is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of >>>> enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and >>>> general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net >>>> neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above >>>> mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is >>>> telecom and which not. >>>> >>>> While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons >>>> one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender >>>> pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to >>>> promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - >>>> or even more specific things like open peering and the such. >>>> >>>> I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which >>>> can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and >>>> it should be opposed. >>> In Brazil the Ministry of Communications works in partnership with the telcos to remove the net neutrality concept from the Civil Framework for the Internet currently submitted to Congress. This is seen as part of the "freedom package" telcos are trying to push along the lines of "sender party pays" and the freedom to meddle with (and arbitrarily charge for) packet traffic. >>> >>>> /5. Some sundry issues >>>> >>>> /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require >>>> separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether >>>> ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. >>>> These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I >>>> think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if >>>> the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain >>>> 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating >>>> agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and >>>> diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to >>>> be included. >>>> >>>> (ends) >>>> >>>> >>> frt rgds >>> >>> --c.a. >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC >> http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 13:35:19 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 13:35:19 -0400 Subject: [governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote In-Reply-To: <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22759CE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> References: <508A1098.9050303@gmx.net> <508BFA20.9080903@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2275764@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD22759CE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Milton L Mueller wrote: > So you take a statement of mine that notes an absence of mobilization > from either business or civil society for CIRP, and you distort it into a > claim that **** > > * the only opinions that matter are those of business, * > > dishonest, pointless to discuss further > Milton, you were defining "popular support" not simply for CIRP purposes - for why would you introduce a double standard in the definition of popular support - one definition for CIRP and one more general definition? This discussion has much broader ramifications and importance. Besides, you are a professor and a native speaker of English and presumably in control of your words and writing. If it were merely a question of my "dishonesty" you could quote a correction from your writing of the last few days and assert you wrote nothing on the point inconsistent with that and then perhaps my dishonesty would be proved. Alternatively, you could perhaps clarify/state your true view about popular support and MS governance and its impact more clearly. You have also declined to do that at any reasonable length. Please note that, while you state that this is just about CIRP, the title of this thread has nothing to do with CIRP and you have voluntarily participated. Your autosig below indicates expertise in internet governance more generally, so it is hardly outside of your professed field to address these issues (as opposed to CIRP narrowly speaking, regarding which your expertise is quite doubtful since it is specific). It is to be expected that experts in internet governance be conversant and think deeply about the most fundamental issues of importance in governance, and democratic legitimacy is most certainly one of those most important issues. I'm aware from general experience that human beings very rarely admit an insufficiency and change their mind on the spot. It takes time - and probably it should take time - to reconsider one's view and perhaps change it. A person of your caliber and governance expertise should surely be conversant with democratic representativity and the like, so I will take your replies here as an indication that you will be either rethinking or thinking more deeply about your views, instead of just rethinking your participation on this important subject on this listserv. It seems you need to do so, even if only to be better able to defend your views. Paul Lehto, J.D. > **** > > ** ** > > Milton L. Mueller**** > > Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies**** > > Internet Governance Project**** > > http://blog.internetgovernance.org **** > > ** ** > > ** ** > -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From pwilson at apnic.net Mon Oct 29 14:08:40 2012 From: pwilson at apnic.net (Paul Wilson) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:08:40 +1000 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <6EDD0A67-D9DF-4236-8D7F-6E5514C832EF@apnic.net> Parminder, On the topic of network neutrality I will only comment that it is the Internet of today which affords us the luxury of having a debate at all. Prior to the Internet, the concept hardly existed, and was not a reasonable expectation of any of the networks which existed then (which typically bundled application and connectivity services together, and then charged extra for new applications and for interconnection). It is also possible to imagine a future "Internet", featuring imposed barriers between countries, or regulated barriers between companies, or licensing of applications, or featuring a mishmash of different approaches to all of these; and in which network neutrality has become a forgotten concept, and the debate is no more. Even if I don't have a position, I prefer that we can continue to have a debate :-) Paul. On 30/10/2012, at 3:09 AM, parminder wrote: > > Carlos and Paul, > > Thanks for your response. > > First of all, let me say that our, IT for Change's, real view on this matter is that new ITRs should have been a part of a larger look at how Internet works and what is necessary to be done in terms of its governance in public interest, more so from the viewpoint of those who are currently marginalised, whose interests we seek to espouse. This was, and is, necessary now, since Internet is no longer the 'interesting new thing' that it was 10-15 years ago. It is today a defining force shaping our societies, our social structures, and its power relationships. We at IT for Change, and our partner networks, are unable to satisfy ourselves that the way Internet has grown and shaped in the last few years is the best way for it to go, in terms of economic and social justice. It is increasingly causing a greater rather than lesser concentration of power, which trend is, in our view, not only possible to check, it is our collective duty to do so. > > Coming back to Internet governance, over the last few years we should have beendiscussing (rather than stalling such discussions) what part of the Internet needs what kind of governance - which is just, democratic, pluralistic etc. Not that we would have immediately come to the perfect solution, but we would have been closer to it, and, we would have have been closer to having a better understanding, perhaps even some degree of consensus, regarding what should go into the ITRs and what should not. Having a discussion on whether telecom regulators should have jurisdiction over transport aspects of the Internet or not 5 days before public comments into the ITU process closes is not the best way to be dealing with this issue. I do believe, for instance, that ITR amendments should have accompanied some kind of an agreement with everyone accepting the appropriateness and legitimacy of the current distributed system of DNS and technical standards management of the Internet, with perhaps a statement of a few general principles on the areas in which further evolutionary improvements need to be sought. The CIRs oversight issue needs to be resolved, at least discussed with all sincerity, at another level, and so also the issues of broader Internet related public policies, the mandate of OECD's CICCP and the proposed mandate of CIRP. All of this should be a kind of one package, because what we do in one place is linked to what is done or not done in another. > > Instead of taking such an holistic, and allow me to say, sincere, approach, what actually is sought be done is to treat ITR amendments as a kind of ugly emergency that needs to be given a fire-fighting response, and soon, when the fires are doused, we can be back to the merry neoliberal times of unbridled growth and shaping of the Internet in a manner that further entrenches existing power, without any kind of public interest oversight or intervention. > > Sorry for the lengthy disclaimer, but it was necessary for it to be stated to frame my response to the immediate issue at hand; whether any part of the Internet (meaning here the transport/ infrastructural) should to be within ITU's remit of not. > > For us, the basic question that we need to address here is; Is the availability a net neutral Internet to be considered just as a normal commercial service or good, subject to normal laws of commerce alone, or is it to be considered at a special level, as a guaranteed, universal service (which is free, subsidized etc when required), and whose qualities, like net neutrality, and other kinds, just have to be maintained, and if needed, will be enforced through a special dedicated system, as for instance telecom regulators do for telecom. > > How we proceed further depends on what response we give to this question. I know Milton's response to this question, but for others who think that Internet is not just like any other commercial good, and its basic availability and nature (net neutrality etc) has to be ensured, we then have to decide that either this is ensured by the existing telecom regulators, or we set up a new Internet regulatory authority. > > At this stage, we can make a distinction between the Internet as a basic infrastructure, which, I think requires the above protection, and its content and application layers where the barrier to entry, competition dynamics are 'normally' of a qualitatively different kind. This is why the content and applications layers should be kept out of the regulatory purview. > > And if indeed the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet needs to be regulated, now with increasing IP based convergence, since telecom regulator soon will have little non IP based infrastructure to regulate, it goes to reason that they regulate the transport layer of the Internet, which definitionally continues to be considered as telecom (which in fact as per existing definitions in the existing ITRs, and not only in ITRs but as per telecom statutes in most countries, is does indeed already count as telecom). > > For those who want ITU not to have remit over the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet, the question is; do they also want national level telecom regulators to not have anything to do with even with the transport part of the Internet. This would so much delight the telecom companies. In the US, they are fighting precisely this case against FCC's rulings on net neutrality, and I recently heard a guy from a telecom association in India mutter something to a similar effect. > > There will be no net neutrality without a regulator for the Internet's transport layer. I think this much is understood by all net neutrality supporters. And there will be no universal service obligations, cross subsidisation for under served regions etc. We have to indeed be careful about what we ask at the ITU's ITR discussions, because the chickens will soon come home to roost, at the national level, whereby we would have perhaps permanently compromised possibilities of public interest regulation over the transport layer of the Internet, including any possibility of ensuring net neutrality. > > US citizens perhaps have a vote between no net neutrality (elect Romney) or weak version of net neutrality, that doesnt extend to mobiles (re-elect Obama), but for the others less fortunate, international norms in this area are something that may be among the few positive hopes to clutch to. Getting Internet's transport layer out of the definition of telecom would basically set a norm that will soon travel downwards to the national levels, of course on the wings of the powerful multi national telecoms, to challenge the remit and authority of national telecom regulators to enforce any kind of net neutrality. > > parminder > > > On Monday 29 October 2012 06:40 PM, Paul Wilson wrote: >> Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. >> >> Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. >> >> In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. >> >> Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? >> >> On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. >> >> It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. >> >> I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. >> >> Paul. >> >> >> On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >> >> >>> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. >>> >>> fraternal regards >>> >>> --c.a. >>> >>> On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >>> >>>> Hi All >>>> >>>> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >>>> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >>>> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >>>> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >>>> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >>>> here as well. parminder >>>> >>>> (begins) >>>> >>>> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >>>> follows: >>>> >>>> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >>>> >>>> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >>>> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >>>> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >>>> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >>>> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >>>> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >>>> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >>>> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >>>> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >>>> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >>>> >>>> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >>>> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >>>> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >>>> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >>>> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >>>> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >>>> >>> Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. >>> >>> >>>> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >>>> >>>> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >>>> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >>>> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >>>> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >>>> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >>>> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >>>> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >>>> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >>>> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >>>> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >>>> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >>>> territories for the sake of international communication'. >>>> >>>> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >>>> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >>>> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >>>> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >>>> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >>>> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >>>> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >>>> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >>>> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >>>> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >>>> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >>>> >>> I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. >>> >>> >>>> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >>>> >>>> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >>>> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >>>> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >>>> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >>>> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >>>> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >>>> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >>>> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >>>> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >>>> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >>>> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >>>> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >>>> >>>> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >>>> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >>>> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >>>> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >>>> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >>>> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >>>> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >>>> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >>>> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >>>> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >>>> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >>>> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >>>> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >>>> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >>>> >>>> This is something we really may have to spend a lot of time on. Our >>>> tentative suggestion is that we find a way whereby the transport / >>>> infrastructural layer is included in the definition of telecommunication >>>> (which also is closest to reality) and thus in ITR's remit. At the same >>>> time content and application layers are explicitly excluded. >>>> Contributing the right language in this respect may be one of the most >>>> important things that we can do. But as I said, this requires a lot of >>>> thinking and discussion among us. >>>> >>>> In trying any such definitional separations, the issue of 'security' >>>> would become a sticking point. In fact, 'security' may be an issue we >>>> may have to separately treat in our submission, becuase there is also a >>>> lot of tricky language in the current draft around this issue. >>>> >>> The Internet is *composed* of layers, not *divided into* layers. This is crucial. If the telcos take over transport and routing, its consequences propagate to the upper layers, negatively affecting content providers, local Internet service providers, and above all the final users -- it will certainly be another kind of Internet. >>> >>> >>>> /4. Net neutrality or an open Internet >>>> >>>> /We should certainly speak against the ETNO proposal of a 'sender pays' >>>> arrangement. However, we should seek to go beyond it. Everywhere it is >>>> recognised that net neutrality is a regulatory issue. Net neutrality >>>> cannot survive with regulatory intervention, or at least some kind of >>>> normative soft pressure from regulatory quarters. So if there is an >>>> issue called 'global net neutrality' (CoE's experts report) then there >>>> is perhaps some role for a global regulatory system - if not of >>>> enforceable rules, at least for providing normative frameworks and >>>> general principles. And net neutrality concerns the transport layer, net >>>> neutrality concerns can be accommodated even while we do the above >>>> mentioned 'definitional separations' about what part of the Internet is >>>> telecom and which not. >>>> >>>> While even US telecoms are opposed to the ETNO proposal (for reasons >>>> one can appreciate) what they themselves propose in the US is the sender >>>> pays principle. Is it possible to use the ITR text in some way to >>>> promote a normative framework for net neutrality or an open Internet - >>>> or even more specific things like open peering and the such. >>>> >>>> I read in the CDT's document about problems with use of QoS term which >>>> can become the normative indication for violation of net neutrality and >>>> it should be opposed. >>>> >>> In Brazil the Ministry of Communications works in partnership with the telcos to remove the net neutrality concept from the Civil Framework for the Internet currently submitted to Congress. This is seen as part of the "freedom package" telcos are trying to push along the lines of "sender party pays" and the freedom to meddle with (and arbitrarily charge for) packet traffic. >>> >>> >>>> /5. Some sundry issues >>>> >>>> /Apart the issue of 'security' mentioned above, which may require >>>> separate treatment, I can see two other important issues. One, whether >>>> ITRs should stay as general principles or they should become mandatory. >>>> These is alternative language in the current draft on these option. I >>>> think we should seek that ITRs stay as general principles. Second, if >>>> the principal parties that are subject to ITRs should remain >>>> 'administrations' or be changed to 'member states and operating >>>> agencies'. I think the telecom environment has become complex and >>>> diverse enough to require the more flexible term 'operating agencies' to >>>> be included. >>>> >>>> (ends) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> frt rgds >>> >>> --c.a. >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >> ________________________________________________________________________ >> Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC >> >> http://www.apnic.net >> +61 7 3858 3100 >> >> >> > ________________________________________________________________________ Paul Wilson, Director-General, APNIC http://www.apnic.net +61 7 3858 3100 -------------- 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 From lehto.paul at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 14:10:08 2012 From: lehto.paul at gmail.com (Paul Lehto) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:10:08 -0400 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar < chaitanyabd at gmail.com> wrote: Are there even "laws" as far as the internet itself is concerned? (not talking about laws governments have created; I mean laws that form a legal foundation of the internet) - my assumption was that such a thing didnt exist.... Governments making laws yes but those laws are not the foundation of a free, open internet because in it's original, free, open form the internet is based around concept, understanding, achievement - not laws. Or am I wrong here? One can get very large legal books entitled "internet law" or similar. But you are anticipating that and asking if law provides a foundation for the internet. In a general sense I would say yes, because the general laws of contract and intellectual property provide such a foundation, and the issue at this level is whether we will apply all of the law (including consumer protection and anti-discrimination laws) to the internet, or just the laws that business forces find most useful - contract and property laws. More specifically, though, in legal systems founded on freedom, no License is needed to create something like the internet and one need only look for prohibitory laws that may be applicable. In this sense there can not be a fundamental "foundation" law authorizing the internet or any other creative human activity. Perhaps you are thinking of something like an Enabling Act - things that usually authorize things like the settling of territory, etc. These enabling acts arise out of powers of otherwise limited and supposedly freedom-loving governments that are typically considered plenary or total powers, like immigration/emigration and national security. If these powers are implicated, then legal permission or license is required in order to act or create. Thus, one must have an affirmative act or law supporting their right to emigrate to a country or immigrate into a given country. In conclusion, in countries based on a presumption of freedom, contract and property laws nevertheless provide a general foundation but not a specific permission, license, or specific structure for the internet. In other countries, one needs not only the general foundation but the specific structure and permission, and creativity is thus more limited. In addition, a third class of laws that wished to assist internet development (perhaps with a subsidy) and also structure some of its aspects along the way may exist and provide something you may consider a "foundation". Of course, these vary from country to country. Paul Lehto, J.D. -- Paul R Lehto, J.D. P.O. Box 1 Ishpeming, MI 49849 lehto.paul at gmail.com 906-204-4965 (cell) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 16:25:03 2012 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 15:25:03 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Hurricane Sandy hits Jamaica Message-ID: Dear All, Just sharing a link with you on the devastation by Sandy of Jamaica. Please remember us in your prayers. http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20121029/news/news1.html -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 16:49:04 2012 From: salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com (Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:49:04 +1200 Subject: [governance] Re: Hurricane Sandy hits Jamaica In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Devon, Thank you for alerting us. I hope that you guys will be ok. Best wishes for safety to all those who are experiencing the wrath of "Sandy". I hear that it's in the US. Warm Regards, Sala On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Devon Blake wrote: > Dear All, > Just sharing a link with you on the devastation by Sandy of Jamaica. > Please remember us in your prayers. > > http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20121029/news/news1.html > > > > -- > Devon Blake > Special Projects Director > Earthwise Solutions Limited > 29 Dominica Drive > Kgn 5 > ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 > > To be kind, To be helpful, To network > *Earthwise ... For Life!* > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From devonrb at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 17:03:55 2012 From: devonrb at gmail.com (Devon Blake) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 16:03:55 -0500 Subject: [governance] Re: Hurricane Sandy hits Jamaica In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks Sala, I do appreciate your concern. Devon On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro < salanieta.tamanikaiwaimaro at gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Devon, > > Thank you for alerting us. I hope that you guys will be ok. Best wishes > for safety to all those who are experiencing the wrath of "Sandy". > > I hear that it's in the US. > > Warm Regards, > Sala > > On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Devon Blake wrote: > >> Dear All, >> Just sharing a link with you on the devastation by Sandy of Jamaica. >> Please remember us in your prayers. >> >> http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20121029/news/news1.html >> >> >> >> -- >> Devon Blake >> Special Projects Director >> Earthwise Solutions Limited >> 29 Dominica Drive >> Kgn 5 >> ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 >> >> To be kind, To be helpful, To network >> *Earthwise ... For Life!* >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > > -- > Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala > P.O. Box 17862 > Suva > Fiji > > Twitter: @SalanietaT > Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro > Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851 > > > > > -- Devon Blake Special Projects Director Earthwise Solutions Limited 29 Dominica Drive Kgn 5 ,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 To be kind, To be helpful, To network *Earthwise ... For Life!* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From bdelachapelle at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 17:17:06 2012 From: bdelachapelle at gmail.com (Bertrand de La Chapelle) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 22:17:06 +0100 Subject: [governance] Internet & Jurisdiction at the IGF 2012 in Baku Message-ID: Dear all, As you may know, I have been leading since January 2012 an Internet & Jurisdiction Project at the International Diplomatic Academy. This multi-stakeholder dialogue process addresses the growing tension between the technically cross-border Internet and an international system of jurisdictions based on national geographic territories. We will organize in Baku two workshops (see below) on this topic that you are warmly invited to attend, either physically or remotely. I know the agenda is full of very good workshops but hope you'll find the topic and panelists interesting. You'll also find below more information about the project if you are interested. Looking forward to seeing you soon in Baku. Best Bertrand PS: Apologies for cross-posting with the Internet Principles dynamic coalition mailing list. Internet & Jurisdiction at the IGF 2012 in Baku The Internet & Jurisdiction Project is hosting two workshops at this year's Internet Governance Forum that takes place from 6-9 November, 2012 in Baku, Azerbaijan. Remote participation and livestreams will be available at http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation. You can also meet us at our booth in the IGF Village! What is the Geography of Cyberspace? What Frameworks for Cross-Border Online Communities and Services *November 9 / 11:00am - 12:30pm AZT / Conference Room #2* [image: What is the Geography of Cyberspace? Flyer] Download *Pannelists:* Vint Cerf, Internet Co-Founder and VP & Chief Internet Evangelist at Google Wolfgang Kleinwächter, University of Aarhus and HIIG Erika Mann, Public Policy at Facebook and ICANN Board Member Marietje Schaake, Member of the European Parliament V.C. Vivekanandan, Director of the GIGA Institute Hyderabad *November 8, 2012 / 4:30pm - 6:00pm AZT / Conference Room #2* Download *Pannelists:* Fiona Alexander, NTIA US Department of Commerce Constance Bommelaer, Public Policy Director at ISOC Brian Cute, CEO of PIR (Manager of .org) Lee Hibbard, Council of Europe Marilia Maciel, CTS Getulio Vargas Foundation Patrick Ryan, Policy Council at Google Have a look at our new brochure for more information! [image: Internet & Jurisdiction Brochure] [image: Twitter] [image: Facebook] [image: Google+] [image: LinkedIn] Internet & Jurisdiction facilitates a global multi-stakeholder dialogue process to explore the tension between a technically borderless Internet and geographically defined national jurisdictions. The project is organized in partnership with the International Diplomatic Academy. Visit our website: www.internetjurisdiction.net Project Director: Bertrand de La Chapelle Project Manager: Paul Fehlinger -- ____________________ Bertrand de La Chapelle Internet & Jurisdiction Project Director, International Diplomatic Academy ( www.internetjurisdiction.net) Member, ICANN Board of Directors Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32 "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de Saint Exupéry ("there is no greater mission for humans than uniting humans") -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From shailam at yahoo.com Mon Oct 29 17:35:59 2012 From: shailam at yahoo.com (shaila mistry) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 14:35:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] Re: Hurricane Sandy hits Jamaica In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1351546559.94595.YahooMailNeo@web160505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Hope everyone is safe in Jamaica Prayers Shaila  The journey begins sooner than you anticipate ! ..................... the renaissance of composure ! ________________________________ From: Salanieta T. Tamanikaiwaimaro To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Devon Blake Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Hurricane Sandy hits Jamaica Dear Devon, Thank you for alerting us. I hope that you guys will be ok. Best wishes for safety to all those who are experiencing the wrath of "Sandy". I hear that it's in the US. Warm Regards, Sala On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 8:25 AM, Devon Blake wrote: Dear All, >Just sharing a link with you on the devastation by Sandy of Jamaica. Please remember us in your prayers. > >http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20121029/news/news1.html > > > >-- >Devon Blake >Special Projects Director >Earthwise Solutions Limited >29 Dominica Drive >Kgn 5 >,Phone: Office 876-968-4534, Mobile, 876-483-2632 > >To be kind, To be helpful, To network >Earthwise ... For Life! > > >____________________________________________________________ >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 > > -- Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro aka Sala P.O. Box 17862 Suva Fiji Twitter: @SalanietaT Skype:Salanieta.Tamanikaiwaimaro Fiji Cell: +679 998 2851   ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From avri at acm.org Mon Oct 29 18:38:12 2012 From: avri at acm.org (Avri Doria) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:38:12 -0400 Subject: [governance] where did the 'mysterious' CIRP come from In-Reply-To: <508B67B0.2070604@itforchange.net> References: <508B67B0.2070604@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <267F79E0-D4AE-4F6E-9B66-C6D4EEF53422@acm.org> On 27 Oct 2012, at 00:48, parminder wrote: > " 3. WSIS mandated the creation of an IGF, and, due to inconclusive negotiations, gave somewhat unclear recommendations on the needed mechanism for global Internet related policies. Basically, the unmistakable mandate was to discuss this issue further, with specific assertions that something that addresses the imperative of global Internet policies is certainly needed. The Tunis agenda is clear to this extent. " (repeating things i think I have said on this list before, but a while ago and in an earlier cycle of this conversation) I contend that that Tunis Agenda was not at all unclear about this. Rather the governments that did not want this & got the General Assembly to ignore the Tunis Agenda on this issue. And for various reasons, most of us (to their credit, not the best bits drivers) went along. As I read the text, 67 calls for a forum in a general sense, 69 calls for the equal participation of governments (aka Enhanced Cooperation), 70 calls for the participation of existing IG organizations, 71 calls for UNSG initiation of a multistakeholder organization and 72 defines the forum called for in 67. The IGF is the place for continuing discussions on Enhanced Cooperation. I beleive that this is what the agreed upon language calls for, but the GA et al. nix'ed it. I think the IGF is now mature enough to get it back on track. The IGF has lingered long enough on finding its modalities and trust. Now it is time it took on this responsiblity. chers, avri -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 18:40:40 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:40:40 +0800 Subject: [governance] France eyes 'Google Tax' for French websites Message-ID: <01d001cdb626$8ea6f010$abf4d030$@gmail.com> http://news.yahoo.com/france-eyes-google-tax-french-websites-194621799--fina nce.html -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Oct 29 20:57:31 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:27:31 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <6EDD0A67-D9DF-4236-8D7F-6E5514C832EF@apnic.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> <6EDD0A67-D9DF-4236-8D7F-6E5514C832EF@apnic.net> Message-ID: <3AC5DA7F-1786-4B4E-916F-67CC35072D84@hserus.net> I do agree with Paul about the pitfalls of trying to bring the transport layer under the ITRs. And I seriously doubt OECD would consider their committees or working groups to be any sort of regulatory organisation, if that was what you meant. Peer review, analysis, best practice, metrics .. How or why are those being dragged into a discussion of regulating any part of the Internet? --srs (iPad) On 29-Oct-2012, at 23:38, Paul Wilson wrote: > Parminder, > > On the topic of network neutrality I will only comment that it is the Internet of today which affords us the luxury of having a debate at all. > > Prior to the Internet, the concept hardly existed, and was not a reasonable expectation of any of the networks which existed then (which typically bundled application and connectivity services together, and then charged extra for new applications and for interconnection). > > It is also possible to imagine a future "Internet", featuring imposed barriers between countries, or regulated barriers between companies, or licensing of applications, or featuring a mishmash of different approaches to all of these; and in which network neutrality has become a forgotten concept, and the debate is no more. > > Even if I don't have a position, I prefer that we can continue to have a debate :-) > > Paul. > > > > On 30/10/2012, at 3:09 AM, parminder wrote: > >> >> Carlos and Paul, >> >> Thanks for your response. >> >> First of all, let me say that our, IT for Change's, real view on this matter is that new ITRs should have been a part of a larger look at how Internet works and what is necessary to be done in terms of its governance in public interest, more so from the viewpoint of those who are currently marginalised, whose interests we seek to espouse. This was, and is, necessary now, since Internet is no longer the 'interesting new thing' that it was 10-15 years ago. It is today a defining force shaping our societies, our social structures, and its power relationships. We at IT for Change, and our partner networks, are unable to satisfy ourselves that the way Internet has grown and shaped in the last few years is the best way for it to go, in terms of economic and social justice. It is increasingly causing a greater rather than lesser concentration of power, which trend is, in our view, not only possible to check, it is our collective duty to do so. >> >> Coming back to Internet governance, over the last few years we should have beendiscussing (rather than stalling such discussions) what part of the Internet needs what kind of governance - which is just, democratic, pluralistic etc. Not that we would have immediately come to the perfect solution, but we would have been closer to it, and, we would have have been closer to having a better understanding, perhaps even some degree of consensus, regarding what should go into the ITRs and what should not. Having a discussion on whether telecom regulators should have jurisdiction over transport aspects of the Internet or not 5 days before public comments into the ITU process closes is not the best way to be dealing with this issue. I do believe, for instance, that ITR amendments should have accompanied some kind of an agreement with everyone accepting the appropriateness and legitimacy of the current distributed system of DNS and technical standards management of the Internet, with perhaps a statement of a few general principles on the areas in which further evolutionary improvements need to be sought. The CIRs oversight issue needs to be resolved, at least discussed with all sincerity, at another level, and so also the issues of broader Internet related public policies, the mandate of OECD's CICCP and the proposed mandate of CIRP. All of this should be a kind of one package, because what we do in one place is linked to what is done or not done in another. >> >> Instead of taking such an holistic, and allow me to say, sincere, approach, what actually is sought be done is to treat ITR amendments as a kind of ugly emergency that needs to be given a fire-fighting response, and soon, when the fires are doused, we can be back to the merry neoliberal times of unbridled growth and shaping of the Internet in a manner that further entrenches existing power, without any kind of public interest oversight or intervention. >> >> Sorry for the lengthy disclaimer, but it was necessary for it to be stated to frame my response to the immediate issue at hand; whether any part of the Internet (meaning here the transport/ infrastructural) should to be within ITU's remit of not. >> >> For us, the basic question that we need to address here is; Is the availability a net neutral Internet to be considered just as a normal commercial service or good, subject to normal laws of commerce alone, or is it to be considered at a special level, as a guaranteed, universal service (which is free, subsidized etc when required), and whose qualities, like net neutrality, and other kinds, just have to be maintained, and if needed, will be enforced through a special dedicated system, as for instance telecom regulators do for telecom. >> >> How we proceed further depends on what response we give to this question. I know Milton's response to this question, but for others who think that Internet is not just like any other commercial good, and its basic availability and nature (net neutrality etc) has to be ensured, we then have to decide that either this is ensured by the existing telecom regulators, or we set up a new Internet regulatory authority. >> >> At this stage, we can make a distinction between the Internet as a basic infrastructure, which, I think requires the above protection, and its content and application layers where the barrier to entry, competition dynamics are 'normally' of a qualitatively different kind. This is why the content and applications layers should be kept out of the regulatory purview. >> >> And if indeed the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet needs to be regulated, now with increasing IP based convergence, since telecom regulator soon will have little non IP based infrastructure to regulate, it goes to reason that they regulate the transport layer of the Internet, which definitionally continues to be considered as telecom (which in fact as per existing definitions in the existing ITRs, and not only in ITRs but as per telecom statutes in most countries, is does indeed already count as telecom). >> >> For those who want ITU not to have remit over the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet, the question is; do they also want national level telecom regulators to not have anything to do with even with the transport part of the Internet. This would so much delight the telecom companies. In the US, they are fighting precisely this case against FCC's rulings on net neutrality, and I recently heard a guy from a telecom association in India mutter something to a similar effect. >> >> There will be no net neutrality without a regulator for the Internet's transport layer. I think this much is understood by all net neutrality supporters. And there will be no universal service obligations, cross subsidisation for under served regions etc. We have to indeed be careful about what we ask at the ITU's ITR discussions, because the chickens will soon come home to roost, at the national level, whereby we would have perhaps permanently compromised possibilities of public interest regulation over the transport layer of the Internet, including any possibility of ensuring net neutrality. >> >> US citizens perhaps have a vote between no net neutrality (elect Romney) or weak version of net neutrality, that doesnt extend to mobiles (re-elect Obama), but for the others less fortunate, international norms in this area are something that may be among the few positive hopes to clutch to. Getting Internet's transport layer out of the definition of telecom would basically set a norm that will soon travel downwards to the national levels, of course on the wings of the powerful multi national telecoms, to challenge the remit and authority of national telecom regulators to enforce any kind of net neutrality. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Monday 29 October 2012 06:40 PM, Paul Wilson wrote: >>> Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. >>> >>> Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. >>> >>> In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. >>> >>> Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? >>> >>> On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. >>> >>> It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. >>> >>> I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. >>> >>> Paul. >>> >>> >>> On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. >>>> >>>> fraternal regards >>>> >>>> --c.a. >>>> >>>> On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All >>>>> >>>>> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >>>>> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >>>>> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >>>>> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >>>>> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >>>>> here as well. parminder >>>>> >>>>> (begins) >>>>> >>>>> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >>>>> follows: >>>>> >>>>> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >>>>> >>>>> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >>>>> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >>>>> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >>>>> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >>>>> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >>>>> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >>>>> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >>>>> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >>>>> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >>>>> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >>>>> >>>>> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >>>>> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >>>>> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >>>>> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >>>>> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >>>>> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >>>> Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. >>>> >>>> >>>>> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >>>>> >>>>> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >>>>> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >>>>> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >>>>> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >>>>> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >>>>> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >>>>> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >>>>> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >>>>> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >>>>> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >>>>> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >>>>> territories for the sake of international communication'. >>>>> >>>>> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >>>>> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >>>>> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >>>>> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >>>>> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >>>>> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >>>>> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >>>>> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >>>>> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >>>>> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >>>>> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >>>> I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. >>>> >>>> >>>>> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >>>>> >>>>> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >>>>> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >>>>> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >>>>> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >>>>> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >>>>> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >>>>> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >>>>> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >>>>> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >>>>> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >>>>> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >>>>> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >>>>> >>>>> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >>>>> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >>>>> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >>>>> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >>>>> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >>>>> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >>>>> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >>>>> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >>>>> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >>>>> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >>>>> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >>>>> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >>>>> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >>>>> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >>>>> >>>>> This is something we really may have to spen > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Oct 29 21:00:51 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:30:51 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <5ECAFF1B-5E78-4070-84D1-64FFB0077CC9@hserus.net> The Internet is a construct that may be global but it's use is subject to national and local laws. The Internet governance framework so far is based on regulation - the icann and Iana charter say, and on its administration. Each entity such as the RIRs for example are subject to the laws of the country they are based in. --srs (iPad) On 29-Oct-2012, at 21:24, Chaitanya Dhareshwar wrote: > Are there even "laws" as far as the internet itself is concerned? (not talking about laws governments have created; I mean laws that form a legal foundation of the internet) - my assumption was that such a thing didnt exist.... Governments making laws yes but those laws are not the foundation of a free, open internet because in it's original, free, open form the internet is based around concept, understanding, achievement - not laws. > > Or am I wrong here? > > -C > > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:45 PM, McTim wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: >> > >> >> >> > If one asks "should the UN control the Internet" the vast majority would say >> > no. >> > >> > But if one asks a more specific question, (others could surely phrase a >> > better example here) like "Do you support a free, open internet with >> > consistent worldwide laws and rules instead of a patchwork, fragmented >> > internet?" >> >> This is what we had BEFORE governments started getting involved in IG >> (but we didn't call them laws). >> >> -- >> 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.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 > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Mon Oct 29 21:02:13 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 06:32:13 +0530 Subject: [governance] =?US-ASCII?Q?Fwd=3A_=5BIP=5D_Internet_traffic_exchan?= =?US-ASCII?Q?ge=3A_2_billion_users_an_=3D=3Fwindows-1252=3FQ=3Fd=5Fit=3D9?= =?US-ASCII?Q?2s=5Fdone=5Fon=5Fa=5Fhandshake=5F=3D?= References: Message-ID: --srs (iPad) Begin forwarded message: > From: "DAVID J. FARBER" > Date: 30 October 2012 0:50:56 IST > To: "ip" > Subject: [IP] Internet traffic exchange: 2 billion users an =?windows-1252?Q?d_it=92s_done_on_a_handshake_= > Reply-To: dave at farber.net > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Dewayne Hendricks > Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Internet traffic exchange: 2 billion users an =?windows-1252?Q?d_it=92s_done_on_a_handshake_= > Date: October 29, 2012 12:51:16 PM EDT > To: Multiple recipients of Dewayne-Net > Reply-To: dewayne-net at warpspeed.com > > Internet traffic exchange: 2 billion users and it’s done on a handshake > OCTOBER 22, 2012 > > > Today’s post is written by Rudolf Van der Berg of the OECD’s Science, Technology and Industry Directorate > > Every day one Exabyte of data is said to travel over the Internet – enough data to fill 300,000 of the world’s biggest hard disks or 212 million DVDs. And astonishingly, according to Internet Traffic Exchange: Market Developments and Policy Challenges a new OECD report on Internet traffic exchange, most of the thousands of networks that exchange this traffic do so without a written contract or formal agreement. > > The report provides evidence that the existing Internet model works extremely well, has boosted growth and competition and brought prices for data down to 100,000 times less than that of a voice minute. A survey of 4300 networks, representing 140,000 direct exchanges of traffic, so called peerings, on the Internet, found that 99.5% of “peering agreements” were on a handshake basis, with no written contract and the exchange of data happening with no money changing hands. Moreover, in many locations, multilateral agreements are in place, using a so-called route server, where hundreds of networks will accept to exchange traffic for free with any network that joins the agreement. The parties to these agreements include not only Internet backbone, access, and content distribution networks, but also universities, NGOs, branches of government, individuals, businesses and enterprises of all sorts – a universality of the constituents of the Internet that extends far beyond the reach of any regulatory body’s influence. > > These peering agreements save both parties money and improve quality for their users at the same time. The alternative is to pay third parties, so-called transit providers, which still remains necessary to reach all networks. Paying for transit currently costs between $2 and $150 per Mbit/s per month, depending on country and competition, irrespective of whether a network sends or receives it. > > Under the current system, operators have an incentive to invest and expand their network to reach new peers and cooperate with other networks to establish new Internet exchange points (IXPs) in areas where there are none, because they save on transit costs. Indeed peering locations have been established in every corner of the world and large content providers and Content Distribution Networks have expanded their networks into these locations – in both developed and developing countries. This has saved them and their customers, including the ISPs they peer with and their customers, millions of dollars every year, while greatly increasing quality of service. Expanding IXPs helps keep local traffic local, unburdens interregional links and stimulates investment in local networks. It is for this reason that the OECD has encouraged countries to develop and use IXPs for more than 15 years. > > [snip] > > Dewayne-Net RSS Feed: > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/591238-ec20e345 > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=591238&id_secret=591238-d223f43a > Unsubscribe Now: https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=591238&id_secret=591238-93f6132a&post_id=20121029152433:2EA73A28-21FE-11E2-8A6F-E74652093141 > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Mon Oct 29 21:14:20 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 09:14:20 +0800 Subject: [governance] FW: [OIA] Verizon calls for the return to a utility for broadband and internet.. Message-ID: <023a01cdb63b$f4ad3490$de079db0$@gmail.com> Sometimes the marketing folks see things rather more clearly than the academics or the policy wonks. Now for the policy wonks to try to catch up. M From: oia-bounces at lists.bway.net [mailto:oia-bounces at lists.bway.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Kushnick Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 7:03 AM To: oia at lists.bway.net Subject: [OIA] Verizon calls for the return to a utility for broadband and internet.. Wow -- Verizon agrees with us -- we should make their home internet services - and broadband a utility. --- They even do the research... Most Important Home Utility Is Internet Service, According to Survey http://www.toonaripost.com/2012/10/life-style/most-important-home-utility-is -internet-service-according-to-survey/?utm_source=rss &utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=most-important-home-utility-is-internet-service -according-to-survey Basking Ridge, U.S.A. - More than half (52 percent) of all U.S. Consumers surveyed say Internet service is their home's most important utility, according to the first in a series of tech consumer research surveys, called the Verizon FiOS Innovation Index: Borderless Lifestyle Survey. And if you have an Internet-connectable device with you at all times whenever you leave your home, there is a good chance that you are one of the nearly 40 percent of Americans that the Index identified as "borderless consumers." Verizon believes the Borderless Lifestyle is a result of the convergence of wired and wireless broadband networks, and the unique user flexibility and personal empowerment that converged services enable. The Borderless Lifestyle is about eliminating the old technology boundaries that used to separate networks and service platforms, home and work, allowing customers to connect and accomplish what they want or need to do, whenever they wish, wherever they are, using the device that they prefer. "As the borderless consumer segment continues to grow, so will the need to identify, understand and anticipate what consumers truly want in their increasingly connected lives - today and in the future," said Eric Bruno , vice president of FiOS strategy and development for Verizon. Home is the Hub of Digital Life The FiOS Innovation Index found that while borderless consumers are well-equipped for anytime, anywhere online engagement , their digital activities - communication, entertainment and commerce - still revolve around their physical home. The Index will periodically examine trends in connectivity, device adoption and user experiences that are shaping consumers' lives and driving innovation in the connected media and services industries. The index will provide insights into large-scale trends for adults living in the U.S. and explore how they are using advances in technology and innovation to live a life more connected and without borders. Who are Borderless Consumers? Borderless consumers are found in every ethnic and age group - from millennials to generation X, baby boomers and the mature generation - though 18-to-34 year-olds constitute the greatest number of borderless consumers. Many are college educated, own their home, and nearly half of them earn $75,000or more annually. If you are also motivated to make technology and connectivity upgrades , and are interested in enjoying the benefits of a digital smart home , you are definitely among the 39 percent of U.S. Adults that are living the Borderless Lifestyle. The study also found that women (53 percent) outnumber men (47 percent) in the borderless consumer segment. According to the FiOS Innovation Index, 82 percent of borderless consumers are interested in using network services like cloud-based data storage to access to their data files using any device, from any location, at any time. The vast majority (90 percent) look forward to the day when every connectable device in their house can seamlessly interconnect and work together - via their in-home network or online. All borderless consumers (100 percent) share a common motivation to make technology and connectivity upgrades to enjoy the full benefits of boundary-free living. The Index also indicates that regardless of whether or not an individual is a borderless consumer, more than half of all survey respondents combined (60 percent of borderless consumers and 46 percent of non-borderless consumers) considered their wired Internet service to be the most important utility in their home. All Consumers Still Love Watching Live TV While over-the-top (OTT) video consumption continues to drive Internet traffic growth, its use varies among viewers, depending on their content appetite. While streaming video is primarily adopted by 18- to 34-year-olds across all types of content, the majority of all borderless consumers (89 percent) - and non-borderless consumers (90 percent) - still prefer watching shows on their TVs, according to the survey. "The broadening appeal of anywhere, anytime connectivity is blurring the boundaries that used to separate the home from everywhere else we go every day, and the Borderless Lifestyle Survey offers clear evidence of that," said Ruchir Rodrigues, vice president of technology for Verizon. "Between smartphones, tablets, laptop and desktop computers, and connected TVs and game consoles, consumers want the benefits, convenience and intuitiveness of a connected life and smart home ," Rodrigues said. "This presents a huge innovation opportunity to the technology community as we all pursue the development of new products, apps and services that expand and enrich our borderless lifestyle experience." The Verizon FiOS Innovation Index: Borderless Lifestyle Survey was conducted in the U.S. on behalf of Verizon by Harris Interactive on September 7-11 and polled 2,292 adults aged 18 and over. The online survey was not based on a probability sample and therefore cannot be used as an assessment of the general population; nor can a theoretical sampling error be calculated. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From lmcknigh at syr.edu Tue Oct 30 00:02:45 2012 From: lmcknigh at syr.edu (Lee W McKnight) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 04:02:45 +0000 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <3AC5DA7F-1786-4B4E-916F-67CC35072D84@hserus.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> <6EDD0A67-D9DF-4236-8D7F-6E5514C832EF@apnic.net>,<3AC5DA7F-1786-4B4E-916F-67CC35072D84@hserus.net> Message-ID: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B168028@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> I will throw a few cents in this pot: 1st cent: - the information service vs telecommunications service definitional debate is indeed something of a how many angels fit on the head of a pin discussion; it is one however that has been going on in various FCC regulatory proceedings for, oh, 50 years. But like other theological discussions, for some belief systems, it really matters. - It is that exception from regulation for data processing services which permitted the the data/packet switching net to be born and grow. Telcos can and do provide regulated services via IP packets, but if one is in the business of providing other forms of information services which use IP...well then that is another thing. Of course other countries argue about other things and may not quite get why the definition of 'information service' versus the definition of 'telecommunications service' is such a big deal in the US, but it is and is in fact the end of the Internet as we know it (under US law) should the Internet lose its info service status. Anyway, none of that is news to some around the ITU, who would love to have the Internet become just a mega-telco thing. Admittedly, if US regulators and the courts can agree on the telecoms v info service issues in the next 10 years...they will have made astounding progress compared to the last 50. 2nd cent: The end or transition away from the public switched telecom network is well underway in the US; and many legacy regulations are indeed called into question by the transition. I spoke at an FCC workshop in the topic almost a year ago; but the planning has been going on for much longer than that. With universal service policies successfully reformed by the FCC earlier this year to promote broadband, the transition need not have negative effects for disadvantaged social groups. In fact we might all agree it is a good thing if telcos no longer can collect billions in subsidies for pretending to provide universal service, when not really doing anything except padding their profit margins as they did for the past decade with outmoded universal service policies being a profit center for them (I strongly suspect). So in sum, I suggest proceeding with extreme caution around the ITRs since every word used and agreed to there, like 'telecommunications' or 'information,' can have a huge impact on users of the net of nets. Lee ________________________________________ From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Suresh Ramasubramanian [suresh at hserus.net] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 8:57 PM To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Paul Wilson Cc: parminder; Carlos A. Afonso; governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: Re: [governance] ITRs I do agree with Paul about the pitfalls of trying to bring the transport layer under the ITRs. And I seriously doubt OECD would consider their committees or working groups to be any sort of regulatory organisation, if that was what you meant. Peer review, analysis, best practice, metrics .. How or why are those being dragged into a discussion of regulating any part of the Internet? --srs (iPad) On 29-Oct-2012, at 23:38, Paul Wilson wrote: > Parminder, > > On the topic of network neutrality I will only comment that it is the Internet of today which affords us the luxury of having a debate at all. > > Prior to the Internet, the concept hardly existed, and was not a reasonable expectation of any of the networks which existed then (which typically bundled application and connectivity services together, and then charged extra for new applications and for interconnection). > > It is also possible to imagine a future "Internet", featuring imposed barriers between countries, or regulated barriers between companies, or licensing of applications, or featuring a mishmash of different approaches to all of these; and in which network neutrality has become a forgotten concept, and the debate is no more. > > Even if I don't have a position, I prefer that we can continue to have a debate :-) > > Paul. > > > > On 30/10/2012, at 3:09 AM, parminder wrote: > >> >> Carlos and Paul, >> >> Thanks for your response. >> >> First of all, let me say that our, IT for Change's, real view on this matter is that new ITRs should have been a part of a larger look at how Internet works and what is necessary to be done in terms of its governance in public interest, more so from the viewpoint of those who are currently marginalised, whose interests we seek to espouse. This was, and is, necessary now, since Internet is no longer the 'interesting new thing' that it was 10-15 years ago. It is today a defining force shaping our societies, our social structures, and its power relationships. We at IT for Change, and our partner networks, are unable to satisfy ourselves that the way Internet has grown and shaped in the last few years is the best way for it to go, in terms of economic and social justice. It is increasingly causing a greater rather than lesser concentration of power, which trend is, in our view, not only possible to check, it is our collective duty to do so. >> >> Coming back to Internet governance, over the last few years we should have beendiscussing (rather than stalling such discussions) what part of the Internet needs what kind of governance - which is just, democratic, pluralistic etc. Not that we would have immediately come to the perfect solution, but we would have been closer to it, and, we would have have been closer to having a better understanding, perhaps even some degree of consensus, regarding what should go into the ITRs and what should not. Having a discussion on whether telecom regulators should have jurisdiction over transport aspects of the Internet or not 5 days before public comments into the ITU process closes is not the best way to be dealing with this issue. I do believe, for instance, that ITR amendments should have accompanied some kind of an agreement with everyone accepting the appropriateness and legitimacy of the current distributed system of DNS and technical standards management of the Internet, with perhaps a statement of a few general principles on the areas in which further evolutionary improvements need to be sought. The CIRs oversight issue needs to be resolved, at least discussed with all sincerity, at another level, and so also the issues of broader Internet related public policies, the mandate of OECD's CICCP and the proposed mandate of CIRP. All of this should be a kind of one package, because what we do in one place is linked to what is done or not done in another. >> >> Instead of taking such an holistic, and allow me to say, sincere, approach, what actually is sought be done is to treat ITR amendments as a kind of ugly emergency that needs to be given a fire-fighting response, and soon, when the fires are doused, we can be back to the merry neoliberal times of unbridled growth and shaping of the Internet in a manner that further entrenches existing power, without any kind of public interest oversight or intervention. >> >> Sorry for the lengthy disclaimer, but it was necessary for it to be stated to frame my response to the immediate issue at hand; whether any part of the Internet (meaning here the transport/ infrastructural) should to be within ITU's remit of not. >> >> For us, the basic question that we need to address here is; Is the availability a net neutral Internet to be considered just as a normal commercial service or good, subject to normal laws of commerce alone, or is it to be considered at a special level, as a guaranteed, universal service (which is free, subsidized etc when required), and whose qualities, like net neutrality, and other kinds, just have to be maintained, and if needed, will be enforced through a special dedicated system, as for instance telecom regulators do for telecom. >> >> How we proceed further depends on what response we give to this question. I know Milton's response to this question, but for others who think that Internet is not just like any other commercial good, and its basic availability and nature (net neutrality etc) has to be ensured, we then have to decide that either this is ensured by the existing telecom regulators, or we set up a new Internet regulatory authority. >> >> At this stage, we can make a distinction between the Internet as a basic infrastructure, which, I think requires the above protection, and its content and application layers where the barrier to entry, competition dynamics are 'normally' of a qualitatively different kind. This is why the content and applications layers should be kept out of the regulatory purview. >> >> And if indeed the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet needs to be regulated, now with increasing IP based convergence, since telecom regulator soon will have little non IP based infrastructure to regulate, it goes to reason that they regulate the transport layer of the Internet, which definitionally continues to be considered as telecom (which in fact as per existing definitions in the existing ITRs, and not only in ITRs but as per telecom statutes in most countries, is does indeed already count as telecom). >> >> For those who want ITU not to have remit over the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet, the question is; do they also want national level telecom regulators to not have anything to do with even with the transport part of the Internet. This would so much delight the telecom companies. In the US, they are fighting precisely this case against FCC's rulings on net neutrality, and I recently heard a guy from a telecom association in India mutter something to a similar effect. >> >> There will be no net neutrality without a regulator for the Internet's transport layer. I think this much is understood by all net neutrality supporters. And there will be no universal service obligations, cross subsidisation for under served regions etc. We have to indeed be careful about what we ask at the ITU's ITR discussions, because the chickens will soon come home to roost, at the national level, whereby we would have perhaps permanently compromised possibilities of public interest regulation over the transport layer of the Internet, including any possibility of ensuring net neutrality. >> >> US citizens perhaps have a vote between no net neutrality (elect Romney) or weak version of net neutrality, that doesnt extend to mobiles (re-elect Obama), but for the others less fortunate, international norms in this area are something that may be among the few positive hopes to clutch to. Getting Internet's transport layer out of the definition of telecom would basically set a norm that will soon travel downwards to the national levels, of course on the wings of the powerful multi national telecoms, to challenge the remit and authority of national telecom regulators to enforce any kind of net neutrality. >> >> parminder >> >> >> On Monday 29 October 2012 06:40 PM, Paul Wilson wrote: >>> Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. >>> >>> Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. >>> >>> In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. >>> >>> Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? >>> >>> On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. >>> >>> It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. >>> >>> I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. >>> >>> Paul. >>> >>> >>> On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. >>>> >>>> fraternal regards >>>> >>>> --c.a. >>>> >>>> On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi All >>>>> >>>>> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >>>>> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >>>>> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >>>>> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >>>>> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >>>>> here as well. parminder >>>>> >>>>> (begins) >>>>> >>>>> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >>>>> follows: >>>>> >>>>> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >>>>> >>>>> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >>>>> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >>>>> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >>>>> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >>>>> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >>>>> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >>>>> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >>>>> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >>>>> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >>>>> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >>>>> >>>>> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >>>>> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >>>>> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >>>>> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >>>>> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >>>>> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >>>> Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. >>>> >>>> >>>>> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >>>>> >>>>> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >>>>> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >>>>> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >>>>> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >>>>> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >>>>> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >>>>> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >>>>> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >>>>> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >>>>> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >>>>> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >>>>> territories for the sake of international communication'. >>>>> >>>>> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >>>>> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >>>>> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >>>>> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >>>>> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >>>>> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >>>>> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >>>>> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >>>>> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >>>>> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >>>>> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >>>> I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. >>>> >>>> >>>>> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >>>>> >>>>> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >>>>> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >>>>> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >>>>> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >>>>> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >>>>> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >>>>> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >>>>> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >>>>> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >>>>> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >>>>> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >>>>> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >>>>> >>>>> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >>>>> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >>>>> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >>>>> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >>>>> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >>>>> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >>>>> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >>>>> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >>>>> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >>>>> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >>>>> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >>>>> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >>>>> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >>>>> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >>>>> >>>>> This is something we really may have to spen > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From pouzin at well.com Tue Oct 30 00:05:36 2012 From: pouzin at well.com (Louis Pouzin (well)) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 05:05:36 +0100 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 3:03 PM, McTim wrote: > Hi Louis, > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) > wrote: > > Dear Carlos, FWIW. > > Louis > > - - - > > > > From the WSIS preparation (2002) till now (2012) an enormous amount of > > intellectual exchanges has occurred among stakeholders. Understanding > > internet governance issues has progressed substantially. On the other > hand > > no concrete evolution has taken place. > > In addition to agreeing with Olivier, do you deny that the transition > from a MoU to the AoC is evolutionary? > - - - *Good morning McTim, I said no "concrete" evolution.* *MoU and AoC may be evolutionary in wishful thinking at best, if not cosmetics. Did you notice **ICANN's "evolution" in its wholly hypocritical stance when stalling the bulgarian cyrillic ccTLD ? Opaque non decisions, silly arguments. And to top it all, blatant violation of the Tunis Agenda. Miserable.* *Cheers, Louis* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 30 00:22:16 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 21:22:16 -0700 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B168028@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508E6D09.3030402@cafonso.ca> <192D7FFF-B92C-4825-95C8-EB8B8353448F@apnic.net> <508EB864.7090400@itforchange.net> <6EDD0A67-D9DF-4236-8D7F-6E5514C832EF@apnic.net> <3AC5DA7F-1786-4B4E-916F-67CC35072D84@hserus.net> <77A59FC9477004489D44DE7FC6840E7B168028@SUEX10-mbx-08.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: <20121030042216.GA7994@hserus.net> Also - just how do you claim a broad consensus of civil society for this? Especially when you seek consensus from civil society groups or individuals that are not involved in internet governance fulltime .. though they are definitely possessed of a stake, they are ill informed enough that a few keywords (right or wrong) such as, say, "openness", "democracy", "multistakehodlerism", maybe also "removal of the Internet from US hegemony" might make them sign up to something that is entirely too long and involved for anybody not tracking this issue full time to understand Such claims tend to get taken with a few truckloads of salt, at the very least. srs Lee W McKnight [30/10/12 04:02 +0000]: >I will throw a few cents in this pot: > >1st cent: - the information service vs telecommunications service definitional debate is indeed something of a how many angels fit on the head of a pin discussion; it is one however that has been going on in various FCC regulatory proceedings for, oh, 50 years. But like other theological discussions, for some belief systems, it really matters. > >- It is that exception from regulation for data processing services which permitted the the data/packet switching net to be born and grow. Telcos can and do provide regulated services via IP packets, but if one is in the business of providing other forms of information services which use IP...well then that is another thing. > >Of course other countries argue about other things and may not quite get why the definition of 'information service' versus the definition of 'telecommunications service' is such a big deal in the US, but it is and is in fact the end of the Internet as we know it (under US law) should the Internet lose its info service status. > >Anyway, none of that is news to some around the ITU, who would love to have the Internet become just a mega-telco thing. Admittedly, if US regulators and the courts can agree on the telecoms v info service issues in the next 10 years...they will have made astounding progress compared to the last 50. > >2nd cent: The end or transition away from the public switched telecom network is well underway in the US; and many legacy regulations are indeed called into question by the transition. I spoke at an FCC workshop in the topic almost a year ago; but the planning has been going on for much longer than that. With universal service policies successfully reformed by the FCC earlier this year to promote broadband, the transition need not have negative effects for disadvantaged social groups. In fact we might all agree it is a good thing if telcos no longer can collect billions in subsidies for pretending to provide universal service, when not really doing anything except padding their profit margins as they did for the past decade with outmoded universal service policies being a profit center for them (I strongly suspect). > >So in sum, I suggest proceeding with extreme caution around the ITRs since every word used and agreed to there, like 'telecommunications' or 'information,' can have a huge impact on users of the net of nets. > >Lee > >________________________________________ >From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Suresh Ramasubramanian [suresh at hserus.net] >Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 8:57 PM >To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Paul Wilson >Cc: parminder; Carlos A. Afonso; governance at lists.igcaucus.org >Subject: Re: [governance] ITRs > >I do agree with Paul about the pitfalls of trying to bring the transport layer under the ITRs. > >And I seriously doubt OECD would consider their committees or working groups to be any sort of regulatory organisation, if that was what you meant. Peer review, analysis, best practice, metrics .. How or why are those being dragged into a discussion of regulating any part of the Internet? > >--srs (iPad) > >On 29-Oct-2012, at 23:38, Paul Wilson wrote: > >> Parminder, >> >> On the topic of network neutrality I will only comment that it is the Internet of today which affords us the luxury of having a debate at all. >> >> Prior to the Internet, the concept hardly existed, and was not a reasonable expectation of any of the networks which existed then (which typically bundled application and connectivity services together, and then charged extra for new applications and for interconnection). >> >> It is also possible to imagine a future "Internet", featuring imposed barriers between countries, or regulated barriers between companies, or licensing of applications, or featuring a mishmash of different approaches to all of these; and in which network neutrality has become a forgotten concept, and the debate is no more. >> >> Even if I don't have a position, I prefer that we can continue to have a debate :-) >> >> Paul. >> >> >> >> On 30/10/2012, at 3:09 AM, parminder wrote: >> >>> >>> Carlos and Paul, >>> >>> Thanks for your response. >>> >>> First of all, let me say that our, IT for Change's, real view on this matter is that new ITRs should have been a part of a larger look at how Internet works and what is necessary to be done in terms of its governance in public interest, more so from the viewpoint of those who are currently marginalised, whose interests we seek to espouse. This was, and is, necessary now, since Internet is no longer the 'interesting new thing' that it was 10-15 years ago. It is today a defining force shaping our societies, our social structures, and its power relationships. We at IT for Change, and our partner networks, are unable to satisfy ourselves that the way Internet has grown and shaped in the last few years is the best way for it to go, in terms of economic and social justice. It is increasingly causing a greater rather than lesser concentration of power, which trend is, in our view, not only possible to check, it is our collective duty to do so. >>> >>> Coming back to Internet governance, over the last few years we should have beendiscussing (rather than stalling such discussions) what part of the Internet needs what kind of governance - which is just, democratic, pluralistic etc. Not that we would have immediately come to the perfect solution, but we would have been closer to it, and, we would have have been closer to having a better understanding, perhaps even some degree of consensus, regarding what should go into the ITRs and what should not. Having a discussion on whether telecom regulators should have jurisdiction over transport aspects of the Internet or not 5 days before public comments into the ITU process closes is not the best way to be dealing with this issue. I do believe, for instance, that ITR amendments should have accompanied some kind of an agreement with everyone accepting the appropriateness and legitimacy of the current distributed system of DNS and technical standards management of the Internet, with perhaps a statement of a few general principles on the areas in which further evolutionary improvements need to be sought. The CIRs oversight issue needs to be resolved, at least discussed with all sincerity, at another level, and so also the issues of broader Internet related public policies, the mandate of OECD's CICCP and the proposed mandate of CIRP. All of this should be a kind of one package, because what we do in one place is linked to what is done or not done in another. >>> >>> Instead of taking such an holistic, and allow me to say, sincere, approach, what actually is sought be done is to treat ITR amendments as a kind of ugly emergency that needs to be given a fire-fighting response, and soon, when the fires are doused, we can be back to the merry neoliberal times of unbridled growth and shaping of the Internet in a manner that further entrenches existing power, without any kind of public interest oversight or intervention. >>> >>> Sorry for the lengthy disclaimer, but it was necessary for it to be stated to frame my response to the immediate issue at hand; whether any part of the Internet (meaning here the transport/ infrastructural) should to be within ITU's remit of not. >>> >>> For us, the basic question that we need to address here is; Is the availability a net neutral Internet to be considered just as a normal commercial service or good, subject to normal laws of commerce alone, or is it to be considered at a special level, as a guaranteed, universal service (which is free, subsidized etc when required), and whose qualities, like net neutrality, and other kinds, just have to be maintained, and if needed, will be enforced through a special dedicated system, as for instance telecom regulators do for telecom. >>> >>> How we proceed further depends on what response we give to this question. I know Milton's response to this question, but for others who think that Internet is not just like any other commercial good, and its basic availability and nature (net neutrality etc) has to be ensured, we then have to decide that either this is ensured by the existing telecom regulators, or we set up a new Internet regulatory authority. >>> >>> At this stage, we can make a distinction between the Internet as a basic infrastructure, which, I think requires the above protection, and its content and application layers where the barrier to entry, competition dynamics are 'normally' of a qualitatively different kind. This is why the content and applications layers should be kept out of the regulatory purview. >>> >>> And if indeed the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet needs to be regulated, now with increasing IP based convergence, since telecom regulator soon will have little non IP based infrastructure to regulate, it goes to reason that they regulate the transport layer of the Internet, which definitionally continues to be considered as telecom (which in fact as per existing definitions in the existing ITRs, and not only in ITRs but as per telecom statutes in most countries, is does indeed already count as telecom). >>> >>> For those who want ITU not to have remit over the transport/ infrastructural layer of the Internet, the question is; do they also want national level telecom regulators to not have anything to do with even with the transport part of the Internet. This would so much delight the telecom companies. In the US, they are fighting precisely this case against FCC's rulings on net neutrality, and I recently heard a guy from a telecom association in India mutter something to a similar effect. >>> >>> There will be no net neutrality without a regulator for the Internet's transport layer. I think this much is understood by all net neutrality supporters. And there will be no universal service obligations, cross subsidisation for under served regions etc. We have to indeed be careful about what we ask at the ITU's ITR discussions, because the chickens will soon come home to roost, at the national level, whereby we would have perhaps permanently compromised possibilities of public interest regulation over the transport layer of the Internet, including any possibility of ensuring net neutrality. >>> >>> US citizens perhaps have a vote between no net neutrality (elect Romney) or weak version of net neutrality, that doesnt extend to mobiles (re-elect Obama), but for the others less fortunate, international norms in this area are something that may be among the few positive hopes to clutch to. Getting Internet's transport layer out of the definition of telecom would basically set a norm that will soon travel downwards to the national levels, of course on the wings of the powerful multi national telecoms, to challenge the remit and authority of national telecom regulators to enforce any kind of net neutrality. >>> >>> parminder >>> >>> >>> On Monday 29 October 2012 06:40 PM, Paul Wilson wrote: >>>> Thanks Parminder for a mostly interesting statement, also to Carlos for the useful comments. >>>> >>>> Regarding part 3, whether it's a case of division or composition, it is really essential to be clear on the layers under discussion. >>>> >>>> In the TCP/IP model, we have layers called Link, Internet (Network in OSI), Transport, and Application. The Internet layer corresponds to the IP protocol, and the Transport layer to the TCP protocol. >>>> >>>> Does IT for Change really suggest that the TCP layer should be placed under the ITRs' remit, and if so, how and why? >>>> >>>> On the other hand, it's fairly common to describe Layers 2 and 3 together (i.e. TCP/IP) as the Transport layer, and let's be clear that this layer *IS* the Internet. >>>> >>>> It's essential to understand that the network at these layers did not "just happen" and cannot be taken for granted, as if it is stable and constant. Today's Internet - global, universal, open and neutral - is a direct product of and is maintained through the active management of this layer, and it certainly could change, very fundamentally, under a different approach. >>>> >>>> I have to assume that IT for Change is not asking for TCP/IP to be managed under the ITRs, but Parminder, I suggest you need to clarify, because as it stands, this part of your position should definitely be the most controversial. >>>> >>>> Paul. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 29/10/2012, at 9:48 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi Parm, a few quick comments below. >>>>> >>>>> fraternal regards >>>>> >>>>> --c.a. >>>>> >>>>> On 10/29/2012 06:27 AM, parminder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi All >>>>>> >>>>>> IT for Change had prepared our initial response to the current ITRs >>>>>> draft, and shared it with some civil society groups. Although the >>>>>> following is written as an email based input to the proposed ITR >>>>>> discussions at the BestBits civil society meeting, a version of it was >>>>>> also shared with the Indian government. Thought may be useful to post it >>>>>> here as well. parminder >>>>>> >>>>>> (begins) >>>>>> >>>>>> We see four sets of issues that are most important, and they are as >>>>>> follows: >>>>>> >>>>>> /1. State control over Internet routing system/ >>>>>> >>>>>> This is perhaps the single most controversial issue in the ITR debate, >>>>>> even more than the ITU-ICANN issue discussed above. It is rightly feared >>>>>> that ITRs will be used by authoritarian countries like China and Iran to >>>>>> develop strict state control over the routing of Internet traffic which >>>>>> today is globally ordered to a large extent. Earlier inputs of these >>>>>> countries into the ITR draft were rather more explicit in this regard. >>>>>> Even though rendered relatively bare-bone in the current draft, there is >>>>>> significant text still there that can be used for a tightly controlled >>>>>> Internet routing system, which if taken to its logical end can lead to >>>>>> nation-wise balkanisation of the Internet. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the current draft, it is the text pertaining to section 30 which >>>>>> deals with this issue. Options range from 'states right to know which >>>>>> routes are used', to 'states determining which routes are used', to >>>>>> 'imposing any routing regulation in this regard'. My proposal is to go >>>>>> with one of the listed options which is to suppress section 30 >>>>>> altogether; so, no language on this issue at all. >>>>> Entirely agree. However, this is already done by certain countries independently of ITU's or any other international agreement, and will continue to happen. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> /2. ITU and CIRs management/ >>>>>> >>>>>> One of the most important issues is whether ITU is seeking to, and vide >>>>>> the ITRs be enabled to, take up the functions being performed by the >>>>>> distributed CIR management system as it exists at present. In the >>>>>> current draft, section 31 A is of crucial import in this regard of ITU's >>>>>> feared encroachment of the remit of the ICANN plus system . The options >>>>>> in the current draft regarding this section range from 'naming, >>>>>> numbering, addressing and identification resources will not be mis-used' >>>>>> and 'assigned resources would only be used for the agreed purposes' to >>>>>> 'all ITU recommendations will apply to naming, numbering, addressing and >>>>>> identification resources' (existing or also future ??) to 'nation >>>>>> states, if they elect to, can control these resources within their >>>>>> territories for the sake of international communication'. >>>>>> >>>>>> If ITU recommendations are made vide the new ITRs to apply to names and >>>>>> numbering systems, this may tend towards a creeping encroachment on >>>>>> ICANN's remit. One option in the current draft lists a set of specific >>>>>> ITU recommendations that will apply (these need to be studied >>>>>> individually which I havent). Other options are more open ended, which >>>>>> means future ITU recommendations may also apply, which, may mean that >>>>>> ITU can formally enter into doing and/or supervising ICANN's work. This >>>>>> becomes more problematic when seen along with draft options that make >>>>>> ITRs obligatory and not just a set of general principles. We should >>>>>> speak up against all such efforts to take over, or even substantially >>>>>> affect, the current distributed system of CIRs management. >>>>> I think there is overall consensus that the current names and numbers management system, despite its enormous mishaps (e.g, the recent problems in launching new gTLDs) and a "pluralist" governance which is biased towards the domain name business is currently operationally sound and should not be replaced. If we want a single example of ITU's lousy meddling into the domain name realm, just review the ENUM fiasco. Instead, we have to continue to press ICANN and its contractor (the USG) for true pluralist internationalization -- a major challenge clearly recognized by the new CEO, Fadi Chéadé. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> /3. Definitional issues in the ITRs; telecom or Internet/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Resolving this issue might take a good amount of out time. The issue is >>>>>> really tricky. Putting Internet under telecom, and thus under ITRs and >>>>>> ITU has its problems and a completely new kind of global regulatory >>>>>> system may then be built over it, which would hurt the way Internet has >>>>>> developed and needs to develop. However, it is also difficult to just >>>>>> argue that, when we are in times we are in, Internet traffic will be >>>>>> excluded from telecom definition, because that would beg the question - >>>>>> what then remains of telecommunicaiton in the era of increased IP based >>>>>> convergence. Is then ITU to close down as traditional telephony >>>>>> disappears. Perhaps more importantly, correspondingly, does this new >>>>>> definitional approach also mean that national level telecom regulatory >>>>>> systems like FCC and TRAI wind up sooner or later. >>>>>> >>>>>> We dont think we can afford to be co-opted into the efforts seeking >>>>>> complete deregulation of the entire communications systems that, for >>>>>> instance, are at present being made in the US, which employ >>>>>> definitional logics of a highly dubious kind (like classifying Internet >>>>>> not as a telecommunication but as an information service and thus not >>>>>> subject to common carriage or net neutrality provisions, and similarly >>>>>> rescuing VoIP services from universal service obligations.) At the same >>>>>> time, it is necessary to resist providing constitutional basis to the >>>>>> ITU which can be used to for control of content and application layers. >>>>>> This is the dilemma. What would the implications of putting Internet >>>>>> under telecommunications in the definitional and other sections? What >>>>>> does adding 'processing' signals to just sending, transporting and >>>>>> receiving signals does to what happens in the future vis a vis ITU's >>>>>> role? (These are all existing optional language in the current draft.) >>>>>> >>>>>> This is something we really may have to spen >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From chaitanyabd at gmail.com Tue Oct 30 01:58:20 2012 From: chaitanyabd at gmail.com (Chaitanya Dhareshwar) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:28:20 +0530 Subject: [governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy In-Reply-To: References: <5084F95B.8090400@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD227161C@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2272A45@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> Message-ID: Thanks Paul & srs! I'm glad I asked I'd never considered this pov. Best, Chaitanya On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:40 PM, Paul Lehto wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Chaitanya Dhareshwar < > chaitanyabd at gmail.com> wrote: > Are there even "laws" as far as the internet itself is concerned? (not > talking about laws governments have created; I mean laws that form a legal > foundation of the internet) - my assumption was that such a thing didnt > exist.... Governments making laws yes but those laws are not the foundation > of a free, open internet because in it's original, free, open form the > internet is based around concept, understanding, achievement - not laws. > > Or am I wrong here? > > One can get very large legal books entitled "internet law" or similar. > But you are anticipating that and asking if law provides a foundation for > the internet. In a general sense I would say yes, because the general laws > of contract and intellectual property provide such a foundation, and the > issue at this level is whether we will apply all of the law (including > consumer protection and anti-discrimination laws) to the internet, or just > the laws that business forces find most useful - contract and property > laws. > > More specifically, though, in legal systems founded on freedom, no License > is needed to create something like the internet and one need only look for > prohibitory laws that may be applicable. In this sense there can not be a > fundamental "foundation" law authorizing the internet or any other creative > human activity. Perhaps you are thinking of something like an Enabling Act > - things that usually authorize things like the settling of territory, > etc. These enabling acts arise out of powers of otherwise limited and > supposedly freedom-loving governments that are typically considered plenary > or total powers, like immigration/emigration and national security. If > these powers are implicated, then legal permission or license is required > in order to act or create. Thus, one must have an affirmative act or law > supporting their right to emigrate to a country or immigrate into a given > country. > > In conclusion, in countries based on a presumption of freedom, contract > and property laws nevertheless provide a general foundation but not a > specific permission, license, or specific structure for the internet. In > other countries, one needs not only the general foundation but the specific > structure and permission, and creativity is thus more limited. In > addition, a third class of laws that wished to assist internet development > (perhaps with a subsidy) and also structure some of its aspects along the > way may exist and provide something you may consider a "foundation". Of > course, these vary from country to country. > > Paul Lehto, J.D. > > > > -- > Paul R Lehto, J.D. > P.O. Box 1 > Ishpeming, MI 49849 > lehto.paul at gmail.com > 906-204-4965 (cell) > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 30 02:34:19 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:04:19 +0530 Subject: [governance] The "ICANN Africa Strategy" Is Not the Same as the 'African Agenda' In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <852534E3-0150-4863-B3EB-D457120834AD@hserus.net> http://toronto45.icann.org/node/34895 --srs (iPad) On 25-Oct-2012, at 22:09, Gideon wrote: > The "ICANN Africa Strategy" Is Not the Same as the 'African Agenda' > http://www.circleid.com/posts/20121024_icann_africa_strategy_is_not_the_same_as_the_african_agenda/ > > Gideon Rop > DotConnectAfrica > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From karl at cavebear.com Tue Oct 30 03:14:59 2012 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 00:14:59 -0700 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> Message-ID: <508F7E73.70307@cavebear.com> The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. The reason why the internet is so flexible - and seemingly so much less expensive - as compared to the old telco networks is that the internet is based on "packet switching" rather than the old telco notion of "circuit switching". Attempts to turn the internet back into a circuit switched network will cause the internet to become as inflexible and expensive as the old telco networks. Perhaps then we ought to abandon IP and the internet and resurrect ISDN? That would be stupid - like trying to swim up Yosemite falls. I hope we will not hear much demand for that. There is no one singular thing that one can identify as "internet routing" - IP routing choices are made on a packet-by-packet basis in every IP layer device. And the choice made for packet N does not mandate the choice for packet N+1. The data that feeds that per-packet routing decision comes from many sources - the best known in large scale routing is the BGP protocol. But one has to understand that BGP, and all the other routing protocols, merely feed possibilities into a routing policy mechanism that uses policies to pick and chose among those possibilities to come up with actual packet forwarding decisions. Yes there is a bit of path-binding in the internet: Within providers trunking of paths - which essentially removes the routing choice from individual IP layer switching devices - is often done by wrapping packets with things like MPLS. But any plan to span the internet with a worldwide consistent cross-provider MPLS framework is as doomed to sink under its technical and administrative weight as were notions of spanning the world with consistent ATM VCI/VPI paths. Nor are routes symmetrical - in fact many, perhaps most, internet paths of any distance between an arbitrary hither and arbitrary yon are not symmetrical. Then there are things like source routes - where a packet contains a strict or loose statement of where it should go before it is vectored off towards its indicated destination. And let's not forget anycast routing, a technology that is rather important for things like DNS and content delivery. And then for those who want to go into the mind-warping land of Escher paintings there is IP multicast routing, both the classic multiple-source variety and the more comprehensible single-source variety. And then there are tunnels - consider them as wormholes through any imposed routing regime. Internet routing is a land of danger and unintended consequences - virtually all of the total failures of the internet and its predecessor networks were caused by routing data that got out of control. And in recent years we have seen pieces of the internet world - entire countries or regions - fall off because of polluted routing information of failures of nailed-down physical links. Internet routing is a place for agile dancers, not a place for the muddy boots of governmental bureaucrats. The closest thing that I can imagine that might be what is being desired by these countries is the idea that some countries might want to declare specific ingress and egress portals - pretty much exchange points - which will be the sole point of entry into and out of that country. In BGP terms these would be an AS (autonomous system) with an AS Number (ASN) that is advertised via BGP as a way to send packets to destinations within that country. (How packets exit that country is really not constrained - internet routing really does not care how a packet exited an AS, although specific peering/transit relationships often do care.) If that is what countries want, well then they have it today - all a country needs to do is to is to convince/coerce all of its internal internet providers to agree to abide by an internal routing regime that has one ingress/egress AS, to advertise via BGP that that AS is the way to the IP addresses in that country, and to not accept packets that enter that country except via that path. The technology to do this there, it is in every day use around the world in commercial off the shelf gear. There is no need for an international body to do this: individual countries can today impose this upon themselves if they really want to do so. This does not stop backdoor pathways, particularly for packet egress from a country. But I consider that not a flaw but a feature. --karl-- -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Tue Oct 30 03:44:17 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:44:17 +0100 Subject: [governance] where did the 'mysterious' CIRP come from In-Reply-To: <267F79E0-D4AE-4F6E-9B66-C6D4EEF53422@acm.org> References: <508B67B0.2070604@itforchange.net> <267F79E0-D4AE-4F6E-9B66-C6D4EEF53422@acm.org> Message-ID: <9E4A7AD9-A798-411C-83ED-31E39AC1BDC0@uzh.ch> +1 On Oct 29, 2012, at 11:38 PM, Avri Doria wrote: > > On 27 Oct 2012, at 00:48, parminder wrote: > >> > > > " > 3. WSIS mandated the creation of an IGF, and, due to inconclusive negotiations, gave somewhat unclear recommendations on the needed mechanism for global Internet related policies. Basically, the unmistakable mandate was to discuss this issue further, with specific assertions that something that addresses the imperative of global Internet policies is certainly needed. The Tunis agenda is clear to this extent. > " > > (repeating things i think I have said on this list before, but a while ago and in an earlier cycle of this conversation) > > I contend that that Tunis Agenda was not at all unclear about this. > Rather the governments that did not want this > & got the General Assembly to ignore the Tunis Agenda on this issue. > > And for various reasons, most of us > (to their credit, not the best bits drivers) > went along. > > As I read the text, > > 67 calls for a forum in a general sense, > 69 calls for the equal participation of governments (aka Enhanced Cooperation), > 70 calls for the participation of existing IG organizations, > 71 calls for UNSG initiation of a multistakeholder organization and > 72 defines the forum called for in 67. > > The IGF is the place for continuing discussions on Enhanced Cooperation. > I beleive that this is what the agreed upon language calls for, > but the GA et al. nix'ed it. > > I think the IGF is now mature enough to get it back on track. > The IGF has lingered long enough on finding its modalities and trust. > > Now it is time it took on this responsiblity. > > chers, > > avri > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de Tue Oct 30 03:49:45 2012 From: wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Kleinw=E4chter=2C_Wolfgang=22?=) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:49:45 +0100 Subject: AW: [governance] ITRs References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508F7E73.70307@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD53D@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Thanks Karl very helpful wolfgang ________________________________ Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Karl Auerbach Gesendet: Di 30.10.2012 08:14 An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Betreff: Re: [governance] ITRs The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. The reason why the internet is so flexible - and seemingly so much less expensive - as compared to the old telco networks is that the internet is based on "packet switching" rather than the old telco notion of "circuit switching". Attempts to turn the internet back into a circuit switched network will cause the internet to become as inflexible and expensive as the old telco networks. Perhaps then we ought to abandon IP and the internet and resurrect ISDN? That would be stupid - like trying to swim up Yosemite falls. I hope we will not hear much demand for that. There is no one singular thing that one can identify as "internet routing" - IP routing choices are made on a packet-by-packet basis in every IP layer device. And the choice made for packet N does not mandate the choice for packet N+1. The data that feeds that per-packet routing decision comes from many sources - the best known in large scale routing is the BGP protocol. But one has to understand that BGP, and all the other routing protocols, merely feed possibilities into a routing policy mechanism that uses policies to pick and chose among those possibilities to come up with actual packet forwarding decisions. Yes there is a bit of path-binding in the internet: Within providers trunking of paths - which essentially removes the routing choice from individual IP layer switching devices - is often done by wrapping packets with things like MPLS. But any plan to span the internet with a worldwide consistent cross-provider MPLS framework is as doomed to sink under its technical and administrative weight as were notions of spanning the world with consistent ATM VCI/VPI paths. Nor are routes symmetrical - in fact many, perhaps most, internet paths of any distance between an arbitrary hither and arbitrary yon are not symmetrical. Then there are things like source routes - where a packet contains a strict or loose statement of where it should go before it is vectored off towards its indicated destination. And let's not forget anycast routing, a technology that is rather important for things like DNS and content delivery. And then for those who want to go into the mind-warping land of Escher paintings there is IP multicast routing, both the classic multiple-source variety and the more comprehensible single-source variety. And then there are tunnels - consider them as wormholes through any imposed routing regime. Internet routing is a land of danger and unintended consequences - virtually all of the total failures of the internet and its predecessor networks were caused by routing data that got out of control. And in recent years we have seen pieces of the internet world - entire countries or regions - fall off because of polluted routing information of failures of nailed-down physical links. Internet routing is a place for agile dancers, not a place for the muddy boots of governmental bureaucrats. The closest thing that I can imagine that might be what is being desired by these countries is the idea that some countries might want to declare specific ingress and egress portals - pretty much exchange points - which will be the sole point of entry into and out of that country. In BGP terms these would be an AS (autonomous system) with an AS Number (ASN) that is advertised via BGP as a way to send packets to destinations within that country. (How packets exit that country is really not constrained - internet routing really does not care how a packet exited an AS, although specific peering/transit relationships often do care.) If that is what countries want, well then they have it today - all a country needs to do is to is to convince/coerce all of its internal internet providers to agree to abide by an internal routing regime that has one ingress/egress AS, to advertise via BGP that that AS is the way to the IP addresses in that country, and to not accept packets that enter that country except via that path. The technology to do this there, it is in every day use around the world in commercial off the shelf gear. There is no need for an international body to do this: individual countries can today impose this upon themselves if they really want to do so. This does not stop backdoor pathways, particularly for packet egress from a country. But I consider that not a flaw but a feature. --karl-- -------------- 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 From andrea at digitalpolicy.it Tue Oct 30 08:04:07 2012 From: andrea at digitalpolicy.it (Andrea Glorioso) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:04:07 +0100 Subject: [governance] No Disconnect Strategy / Workshop on a "European Capability for Situational Awareness" / 23 November 2012, Brussels, Belgium Message-ID: [* Apologies if you receive this e-mail more than once. Please share among all your relevant contacts* ] *Short version* You are all kindly invited to a workshop which will be held on *23 November 2012* in Brussels, Belgium, to discuss a key component of the "No Disconnect Strategy" of the European Commission, i.e. the development of a "European Capability for Situational Awareness". The purpose of ECSA is to augment EU decision-making capabilities with reliable and real-time (or almost real-time) information concerning human rights violations in connection with the digital environment. For further information see the full invitation below and the *attached draft agenda*(which will be updated in the coming days). The website of the workshop, where we will also publish preparatory material and the reports of the workshop, will be available shortly. For further information on the *content* of the workshop, please *write to me* (Andrea.Glorioso at ec.europa.eu). To *participate in the workshop* (no fee, but no reimbursement of expenses, either) please *write to Ms Katrin Alfano* (Katrin.Alfano at ec.europa.eu) with your name/surname, nationality and ID / passport number. *Long version* In December 2011 Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission and Commissioner for the Digital Agenda, launched the "No Disconnect Strategy" (NDS), to support and assist human rights defenders, civil society organizations and individual citizens against arbitrary disruptions to the Internet and other electronic communication technologies and indiscriminate surveillance in authoritarian regimes. [1] One of the components of the NDS is the development of a "*European Capability for Situational Awareness*" (ECSA) platform. The purpose of the ECSA platform is to augment EU decision-making capabilities with *reliable* and *real-time* or *almost real-time*information concerning human rights violations and/or restrictions of fundamental freedoms in connection with the digital environment. ECSA would seamlessly aggregate public data from different sources and with innovative visualisation techniques, to provide information on: a) What is happening in the Net, in terms of network connectivity and traffic alterations or restrictions. The platform should integrate and visualize different data sets analysing the "state of the Internet" (nation-, region- or local disconnection, filtering, blocking and other forms of disruptions) in order to allow decision-makers to act upon reliable data concerning the "cyber-geography" of Internet connectivity. b) What is happening on the ground, in terms of human rights, media, legal and policy developments concerning the Internet. The platform should integrate and visualise data sets analysing legal and political developments "on the ground" (e.g. arrests of journalists, crack-downs on local NGOs, etc). We are well aware that there are a number of projects which are working on very similar challenges – and some of these projects might have already developed parts of what the ECSA platform wishes to achieve. Accordingly, the European Commission / DG Communication Networks, Content and Technology would like to invite you to a *workshop* which will take place in *Brussels (Avenue de Beaulieu 25 – Building BU25 – Meeting room 0/S1) on 23 November 2012, from 09:30 to 17:00*, in order to: 1. present and discuss the scope, objectives and "success criteria" of the ECSA platform; 2. present and discuss some of the projects that are working in this field; 3. provide the opportunity for (social) networking and; 4. identify the best way in which the EU can provide *added value* to strengthen on-going activities and achieve the objectives of the ECSA platform, including (where appropriate) via financial support; The workshop is meant to be as informal and operational as possible. If you think you are working on a project that should be presented / discussed during the workshop, please let us know by writing to *Mr* *Andrea Glorioso*( Andrea.Glorioso at ec.europa.eu). The draft agenda of the workshop is attached. The website of the workshop, where we will also publish preparatory material and the reports, will be available shortly. If you wish to participate, please send your *name / family name, nationality and ID / passport number* to *Ms* *Katrin Alfano* ( Katrin.Alfano at ec.europa.eu). Please note that at this point in time the European Commission will not be in a position to reimburse travelling / living expenses for participants or speakers. Should the situation change we will inform you accordingly. *[1] You can find further information on the NDS at http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-11-866_en.htm?locale=en (speech of Vice-President Kroes at the Ministerial Conference on Internet Freedom, 9 December 2012, The Hague) as well as http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/neel ie-kroes/ict-human-rights-guidance/ and http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/neelie-kroes/eu-fighting-cybercensorship/(updates / further info on the work conducted so far). * * * Best, -- Andrea Glorioso (Mr) European Commission - DG Communication Networks, Content and Technology Unit D1 (International relations) + Task Force on Internet Policy Development Avenue de Beaulieu 25 (4/64) / B-1049 / Brussels / Belgium T: +32-2-29-97682 M: +32-460-797-682 E: Andrea.Glorioso at ec.europa.eu Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro The views expressed above are purely those of the writer and may not in any circumstances be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission. Les opinions exprimées ci-dessus n'engagent que leur auteur et ne sauraient en aucun cas être assimilées à une position officielle de la Commission européenne. Be transparent - Sign up to the European Commission's Register of Interest Representatives http://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regrin -- -- I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind. Twitter: @andreaglorioso Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: agenda-20121030-ag1.doc.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 65976 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Tue Oct 30 09:05:49 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 11:05:49 -0200 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <508FD0AD.50004@cafonso.ca> Hi people, first I am not even sure I will be the speaker; second, try to provide suggestions, not engage in debate or I (or the person who will speak) will not be able to sort out what to say. It seems every time Icann and its relationship with the USG is mentioned a button is pressed and automatic reactions ensue... []s frats --c.a. On 10/29/2012 12:03 PM, McTim wrote: > Hi Louis, > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: >> Dear Carlos, FWIW. >> Louis >> - - - >> >> From the WSIS preparation (2002) till now (2012) an enormous amount of >> intellectual exchanges has occurred among stakeholders. Understanding >> internet governance issues has progressed substantially. On the other hand >> no concrete evolution has taken place. > > In addition to agreeing with Olivier, do you deny that the transition > from a MoU to the AoC is evolutionary? > -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Tue Oct 30 09:20:53 2012 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 18:20:53 +0500 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: Actually a summary to that may be that governments in developing countries including ours have resorted to putting into place Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance systems at all points of presence including but not limited to both ISP and regulator layers to monitor, block, filter and censor mobile and online content. This is being done and implemented ahead of the upcoming WCIT/ITR meeting so there is legitimacy in either way should countries oppose or support such recommendations and proposals. These activities are being carried out as Franc La Rue reported during his reports to the Human Rights Council meetings. The fact remains that as US-Centric Internet Resource Management remains, countries have been sold various Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance systems by US and Canadian companies. An evident example is the use of Sandvine traffic intelligence by PTCL Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited. PTCL is the largest ICT/Telecom provider in the country and manages the Internet trunks. A strong note of severe concern should go out that from CS during IGF to the WCIT and ITU as well as participating nations. FoO On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Louis Pouzin (well) wrote: > Dear Carlos, FWIW. > Louis > - - - > > From the WSIS preparation (2002) till now (2012) an enormous amount of > intellectual exchanges has occurred among stakeholders. Understanding > internet governance issues has progressed substantially. On the other hand > no concrete evolution has taken place. US positions are dead set against > any sharing of internet governance, and in the present context it is deemed > to become ever more rigid and conflictual. > > The only forces able to bring about changes are governments initiatives to > organize national governance on their part of the internet. However there > does not appear much commonality in ways they are proceeding. To keep > dialog going on, the IGF should change its ritual theme driven structure. > Instead, governments should be invited to present their internet strategy > along with predictable risks and benefits. > > - - - > > On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Carlos A. Afonso wrote: > >> Dear all, >> >> I have already been approached (Oct.26) by the IGF secretariat regarding >> the indication of my name as a speaker for civil society in the IGF opening >> ceremony. >> >> This has not been decided yet by the secretariat as far as I know. *If* I >> am chosen, I reiterate my earlier message of expecting contributions from >> you all regarding what I should include in my 5-minute speech. >> >> I have received some significant contributions from a few people, >> especially Milton, and will try and post a draft before I fly to Baku >> (which will be early morning on Nov.01). >> >> fraternal regards >> >> --c.a. >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From ivarhartmann at gmail.com Tue Oct 30 10:05:52 2012 From: ivarhartmann at gmail.com (Ivar A. M. Hartmann) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:05:52 -0200 Subject: [governance] ISA new Thematic Group - Hypercitizenship Message-ID: Dear Internet Governance friends, I'm helpingspread the word on the proposed creation of a new thematic group at the International Sociological Assocation called "Hypercitizenship". For all the sociologists in the list, this might be of interest. See bellow. Best regards, Ivar > * > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > * > > Dear Colleague, > > I am delighted to inform you that I proposed to found a new > International Sociological Assocation thematic group( TG) focused on > HYPERCITIZENSHIP (see the manifesto below), hypercytizenship will also be > the key topic of my Scientific Director Speech at WCSA 2012 as WCSA( > www.wcsaglobal.org) was born as a “hypercitizenship lab” to go more and > more international to diffuse research worldwide to found the TG we have to > follow a specific procedure pasted below the manifesto. At the moment we > are three subscribers from three different continents. We are aimed to be > at least 10 subscribers from 7 countrires and 3 continents ,at least. > > If you are an ISA member or you wish to become it before January 2013, I > sincerely wish you ill subcribe this proposal. > > The following ISA scholars already subscribed this initiative > > I wish you too will subscribe this initiative > > Andrea Pitasi(Italy) > > Germano Schwartz (Brasil) > Anuradha Parasar (India) > > Adam Czarnota (Australia). > > Eliana Herrera Vega( Canada) > > Ettore Recchi (Italy) > Ivar Hartmann (Brazil) > Best > > Andrea > > > > > > * THEMATIC GROUP MANIFESTO * > > Hypercitizenship Thematic Group DRAFT MANIFESTO > > The Hypercitizenship concept is focused on the fact that communication > about key challenges of our times is increasingly meaning communication and > public understanding of science and technology for governance and > policymaking on a global, glocal and cosmopolitan scale. Therefore, the > idea of the group moves from the intent to investigate into autonomous > agents and global flows eventually converging by means of autopoietic > systems. > > New hypotheses around possible bio-economic scenarios imply the need to > cope with multiple inputs involving diverse domains in which the idea of a > turbo capitalism inevitably impact on biology, medicine, engineering and > social science. > > The Hypercitizenship TG aims at conceiving, planning, organizing, > evaluating and promoting basic and applied scientific research, both on a > theoretical and on a practical level. > > Even though similar groups may be found within the ISA fields of research, > such as the following: WG01 Sociology on Local-Global Relations, RC 12 > Sociology of Law, RC 51 Sociocybernetics, further and innovative elements > can be traced, for the Hypercitizenship TG will provide a thorough forum > for debating issues belonging to diverse research domains concerning the > fundamental evolutionary challenges that human society is currently facing > in the energetic, ecologic and biotechnological fields by applying a > creative and innovative pluralism at every research stage. > > Indeed, as we approach the challenges of global society, the issue of a > Hypercitizenship global trend suddenly impacts on our perception of what > Systemic science could mean in terms of human (or even hyperhuman) and > social evolution. The image of post human horizons is envisaged, also > suggesting the resort to human artificial prostheses. > > Thus, the “avangarde” of such evolutionary society is made up by the new > emerging knowledge-based elites, also defined as the Elites of the future > and wide horizon leaders. > > New associations of concepts emerge, evoking similarities in terms of > convention and invention of lean thinking and flows or Variety and > Strategy, in order to define an innovative and de-structured way to think > about the creation of a performing hyperhuman society. > > The group will welcome the contribution of scholars and young researchers > coming from different backgrounds but whose research interests may find a > strategic convergence towards a systemic approach to both technological and > human sciences topics > > *THE PROCEDURE TO FOUND AN ISA THEMATIC GROUP*** > > > ISA Research Coordinating Committee (RCC) reviews applications for > establishing new groups at its annual meetings. In your application for a > Thematic Group status, please include: > > - a list of signatories of 10 ISA members in good standing (i.e. who have > paid individual membership dues) with geographical diversity as determined > by the Executive Committee: members from at least 10 countries in 2 > continents or 7 countries in 3 continents. > > - a report on the recent and planned activities of the group; > > - a statement on how a proposed TG is different from the already existing > Research Committees and/or Working/Thematic Groups of the ISA. > > If your application to establish a Thematic Group is submitted before > January 15, 2013 it will be discussed at the RCC meeting in March 2013. > > > > Prof.Andrea Pitasi > Author of THE HYPERHUMAN WORLD > http://www.wcsaglobal.org/images/iperumano.pdf > > Tenured Associate of Legal Systems and Social Complexity at Gabriele > d'Annunzio University > Editor in Chief of the System Theory and Complexity Book Series published > by Aracne > ( > http://www.ibs.it/collana/Teoria+dei+sistemi+e+complessit%26agrave%3B/Aracne/teoria+dei+sistemi+e+complessita.html > ) > Life Honorary President of the World Complexity Science Academy - WCSA ( > www.wcsaglobal.org) > web: www.andreapitasi.com > Twitter: @andreapitasi > Facebook: andrea.pitasi > Skype: andrea.pitasi > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Tue Oct 30 11:31:44 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:31:44 -0700 Subject: Reasons for 'Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance" products (was Re: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony?) In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: <0A663687-8279-4CAC-B76A-22B1AD2411DF@virtualized.org> Fouad, On Oct 30, 2012, at 6:20 AM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > The fact remains that as US-Centric Internet Resource Management remains, countries have been sold various Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance systems by US and Canadian companies. An evident example is the use of Sandvine traffic intelligence by PTCL Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited. PTCL is the largest ICT/Telecom provider in the country and manages the Internet trunks. I'm curious: how does "US-Centric Internet Resource Management" cause PTCL (et al) to purchase products like Sandvine's? Thanks, -drc -------------- 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 From drc at virtualized.org Tue Oct 30 11:48:05 2012 From: drc at virtualized.org (David Conrad) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 08:48:05 -0700 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <508F7E73.70307@cavebear.com> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508F7E73.70307@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <8A9113EA-A478-4093-94BE-4A1A8C6B4910@virtualized.org> Karl, On Oct 30, 2012, at 12:14 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. [much accurate stuff deleted] I suspect this is policy wonk code for national-level control/administration of RPKI/BGPSEC. Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From dogwallah at gmail.com Tue Oct 30 12:35:15 2012 From: dogwallah at gmail.com (McTim) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 12:35:15 -0400 Subject: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony? In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> Message-ID: On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > These activities are being carried out as Franc La Rue reported during his > reports to the Human Rights Council meetings. The fact remains that as > US-Centric Internet Resource Management remains, countries have been sold > various Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance systems by US and > Canadian companies. Why are you linking CIR management with DPI? Chalk and Cheese, let's not conflate issues. -- 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From karl at cavebear.com Tue Oct 30 13:33:41 2012 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 10:33:41 -0700 Subject: Reasons for 'Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance" products (was Re: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony?) In-Reply-To: <0A663687-8279-4CAC-B76A-22B1AD2411DF@virtualized.org> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <508D78D6.7080907@cafonso.ca> <0A663687-8279-4CAC-B76A-22B1AD2411DF@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <50900F75.8020402@cavebear.com> On 10/30/2012 08:31 AM, David Conrad wrote: > I'm curious: how does "US-Centric Internet Resource Management" cause > PTCL (et al) to purchase products like Sandvine's? Which reminds me of something on a rather different tangent. There is a fine line between "bad" monitoring and probing of the net and "good" diagnostic and repair activities. Whatever happens in the world of internet regulation or governance there should be some attention paid to the fact that some of us need to dig into the net to detect wobbles and fix them. The internet will always need skilled technical surgeons - and they will need network tools as sharp and penetrating as scalpels. We need to recognize this and not have systems that threaten or condemn such people just because they may have sharp tools. (Over the years I have built many network diagnostic tools and I have found that active tools - the most dangerous kind - are often the most useful and powerful. But they do need to be used with care and with a sense of ethics.) --karl-- -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Tue Oct 30 13:39:03 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:39:03 +0000 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <8A9113EA-A478-4093-94BE-4A1A8C6B4910@virtualized.org> References: <508E3DFE.90606@itforchange.net> <508F7E73.70307@cavebear.com>,<8A9113EA-A478-4093-94BE-4A1A8C6B4910@virtualized.org> Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F1FE02@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> David, Karl, all, ________________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de David Conrad [drc at virtualized.org] Enviado el: martes, 30 de octubre de 2012 09:48 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] ITRs Karl, On Oct 30, 2012, at 12:14 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. [much accurate stuff deleted] I suspect this is policy wonk code for national-level control/administration of RPKI/BGPSEC. AP: Not in more than a couple countries IMO. Far less sophisticated. Stuff like "IP addresses are alphanumeric identifiers, therefore they should be under national numbering plan" kinda. Memories of a decade or decade and a half but some never noticed when that ship left the port. The mirage still blinds them. Alejandro Pisanty Regards, -drc -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 30 17:13:23 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 02:43:23 +0530 Subject: Reasons for 'Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance" products (was Re: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony?) Message-ID: Or is it fouads argument that sandvine gear was bought specifically to censor any discussion of the cir process? I don't quite understand the logic here either --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "David Conrad" To: Subject: Reasons for 'Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance" products (was Re: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony?) Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 9:01 PM Fouad, On Oct 30, 2012, at 6:20 AM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > The fact remains that as US-Centric Internet Resource Management remains, countries have been sold various Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance systems by US and Canadian companies. An evident example is the use of Sandvine traffic intelligence by PTCL Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited. PTCL is the largest ICT/Telecom provider in the country and manages the Internet trunks. I'm curious: how does "US-Centric Internet Resource Management" cause PTCL (et al) to purchase products like Sandvine's? Thanks, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 30 17:16:14 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (=?utf-8?B?U3VyZXNoIFJhbWFzdWJyYW1hbmlhbg==?=) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 02:46:14 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITRs Message-ID: An extension of that would be "countries should themselves allocate IP addresses to their local businesses and citizens and not have to source them from an rir like ripe, arin, apnic etc. Something that has been going on for a very long time indeed, I remember this position as before the first Athens igf as well and far predating it --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "David Conrad" Subject: [governance] ITRs Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 11:09 PM David, Karl, all, ________________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de David Conrad [drc at virtualized.org] Enviado el: martes, 30 de octubre de 2012 09:48 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] ITRs Karl, On Oct 30, 2012, at 12:14 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. [much accurate stuff deleted] I suspect this is policy wonk code for national-level control/administration of RPKI/BGPSEC. AP: Not in more than a couple countries IMO. Far less sophisticated. Stuff like "IP addresses are alphanumeric identifiers, therefore they should be under national numbering plan" kinda. Memories of a decade or decade and a half but some never noticed when that ship left the port. The mirage still blinds them. Alejandro Pisanty Regards, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From apisan at unam.mx Tue Oct 30 17:22:39 2012 From: apisan at unam.mx (Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 21:22:39 +0000 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F22070@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Suresh, with variations, mabye, but it's been around since the dawn of (IP address) history, and it was noisier in WSIS times when Houlin Zhao, then ITU SG, touted it. Proven wrong then and earlier and later and on it will go. Yours, Alejandro Pisanty ! !! !!! !!!! NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475 Dr. Alejandro Pisanty UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ________________________________ Desde: Suresh Ramasubramanian [suresh at hserus.net] Enviado el: martes, 30 de octubre de 2012 15:16 Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; David Conrad Asunto: Re: [governance] ITRs An extension of that would be "countries should themselves allocate IP addresses to their local businesses and citizens and not have to source them from an rir like ripe, arin, apnic etc. Something that has been going on for a very long time indeed, I remember this position as before the first Athens igf as well and far predating it --srs (htc one x) ----- Reply message ----- From: "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "David Conrad" Subject: [governance] ITRs Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 11:09 PM David, Karl, all, ________________________________________ Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de David Conrad [drc at virtualized.org] Enviado el: martes, 30 de octubre de 2012 09:48 Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Asunto: Re: [governance] ITRs Karl, On Oct 30, 2012, at 12:14 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. [much accurate stuff deleted] I suspect this is policy wonk code for national-level control/administration of RPKI/BGPSEC. AP: Not in more than a couple countries IMO. Far less sophisticated. Stuff like "IP addresses are alphanumeric identifiers, therefore they should be under national numbering plan" kinda. Memories of a decade or decade and a half but some never noticed when that ship left the port. The mirage still blinds them. Alejandro Pisanty Regards, -drc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From suresh at hserus.net Tue Oct 30 17:27:00 2012 From: suresh at hserus.net (Suresh Ramasubramanian) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 02:57:00 +0530 Subject: [governance] ITRs In-Reply-To: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F22070@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> References: <6DCAB3E586E6A34FB17223DF8D8F0D3D59F22070@W8-EXMB-DP.unam.local> Message-ID: <86E7D685-E77C-45F0-AC62-D1A18938FDBF@hserus.net> So old wine in a lovely new bottle --srs (iPad) On 31-Oct-2012, at 2:52, "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" wrote: > Suresh, > > with variations, mabye, but it's been around since the dawn of (IP address) history, and it was noisier in WSIS times when Houlin Zhao, then ITU SG, touted it. Proven wrong then and earlier and later and on it will go. > > Yours, > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > ! !! !!! !!!! > NEW PHONE NUMBER - NUEVO NÚMERO DE TELÉFONO > > > +52-1-5541444475 FROM ABROAD > > +525541444475 DESDE MÉXICO > > SMS +525541444475 > Dr. Alejandro Pisanty > UNAM, Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico > > Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty > Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/22285/4A106C0C8614 > Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty > ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > Desde: Suresh Ramasubramanian [suresh at hserus.net] > Enviado el: martes, 30 de octubre de 2012 15:16 > Hasta: Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch; governance at lists.igcaucus.org; David Conrad > Asunto: Re: [governance] ITRs > > An extension of that would be "countries should themselves allocate IP addresses to their local businesses and citizens and not have to source them from an rir like ripe, arin, apnic etc. > > Something that has been going on for a very long time indeed, I remember this position as before the first Athens igf as well and far predating it > > --srs (htc one x) > > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch" > To: "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" , "David Conrad" > Subject: [governance] ITRs > Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 11:09 PM > > > David, Karl, all, > > ________________________________________ > Desde: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] en nombre de David Conrad [drc at virtualized.org] > Enviado el: martes, 30 de octubre de 2012 09:48 > Hasta: governance at lists.igcaucus.org > Asunto: Re: [governance] ITRs > > Karl, > > On Oct 30, 2012, at 12:14 AM, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > The idea of "State control over Internet routing system" makes my head spin. > [much accurate stuff deleted] > > I suspect this is policy wonk code for national-level control/administration of RPKI/BGPSEC. > > AP: Not in more than a couple countries IMO. Far less sophisticated. Stuff like "IP addresses are alphanumeric identifiers, therefore they should be under national numbering plan" kinda. Memories of a decade or decade and a half but some never noticed when that ship left the port. The mirage still blinds them. > > Alejandro Pisanty > > > Regards, > -drc > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From fouadbajwa at gmail.com Tue Oct 30 19:13:35 2012 From: fouadbajwa at gmail.com (Fouad Bajwa) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 04:13:35 +0500 Subject: Reasons for 'Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance" products (was Re: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Let me try to answer the confusion quickly while I am multitasking between packing and documentation: I'd rather remain implicit. I am sure many of my colleagues from developing countries can list a long list of issues that their countries are concerned about and may be sharing during the WCIT meet and that this list has been discussing in numerous ITR related threads etc. at the end of the day it is more or less around US centric IRM and the challenges of censorship and content filtering. Its not just about iran, russia and china, there are more than a hundred other countries out of which a majority are developing regions and imposing various forms of censorship. My confusion stands around the dual FoE internet policy of these countries that requires some responsibility. Okay, its not only boeing/narus, cisco or sandvine selling censorship but we have huwae in the league of traffic intelligence and DPI as well. Alright, it may be business as usual but this is giving some countries to show and tell the amazing censorship they have implemented. Yes there are jurisdiction issues at play here but then some countries believe in resorting to censorship, blocking and filtering. On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 2:13 AM, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote: > Or is it fouads argument that sandvine gear was bought specifically to > censor any discussion of the cir process? I don't quite understand the > logic here either > > --srs (htc one x) > > > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "David Conrad" > To: > Subject: Reasons for 'Internet Traffic Intelligence and Surveillance" > products (was Re: [governance] speaker at the opening ceremony?) > Date: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 9:01 PM > > > Fouad, > > On Oct 30, 2012, at 6:20 AM, Fouad Bajwa wrote: > > The fact remains that as US-Centric Internet Resource Management > remains, countries have been sold various Internet Traffic Intelligence and > Surveillance systems by US and Canadian companies. An evident example is > the use of Sandvine traffic intelligence by PTCL Pakistan Telecommunication > Company Limited. PTCL is the largest ICT/Telecom provider in the country > and manages the Internet trunks. > > I'm curious: how does "US-Centric Internet Resource Management" cause PTCL > (et al) to purchase products like Sandvine's? > > Thanks, > -drc > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Regards. -------------------------- Foo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From katitza at eff.org Tue Oct 30 20:13:36 2012 From: katitza at eff.org (Katitza Rodriguez) Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 17:13:36 -0700 Subject: [governance] =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?ACTION=3A_What=92s_Your_Anti-Survei?= =?WINDOWS-1252?Q?llance_Success_Story=3F?= Message-ID: <50906D30.1050207@eff.org> Dear all: Government surveillance is a growing problem. From North America to South America, Europe to the Pacific Rim, proposals for mandatory data retention, lawful interception, legislative proposals to broaden law enforcement access to digital communications and other forms of government surveillance threaten to jeopardize individuals’ rights to privacy and freedom of expression. No one understands these challenges better than advocates who work tirelessly to protect and uphold individuals’ fundamental rights, and that is why the International Privacy Team at the Electronic Frontier Foundation is asking you to share the story of how you’re combating this growing surveillance trend in your country. Few tools are more powerful and effective for sharing knowledge and information than storytelling. That’s why we’ve begun a project of collecting success stories on fighting surveillance to compile and share with a global coalition of advocates who are countering problematic proposals in their own country and working to promote privacy-enhancing solutions. Our goal is to create a collection of case studies that can be packaged and distributed as a toolkit for digital freedom activists. We want to help you share your story, get the word out, and inspire activists worldwide. To aid us in this effort, please take a few moments to respond to this brief questionnaire. Responses to each question should not be longer than 150 words. Please send your responses in an email to Rebecca Bowe, EFF’s International Privacy Coordinator (rbowe at eff.org) and include “Anti-Surveillance Success Story” in the subject line. Supporting materials can be attached separately. If you are super busy (as usual), please send us your Skype username and Rebecca will do a brief interview with you on this topic -- but be sure to include the same subject line for your message. We will share the final version of our Success Stories for Privacy package once it has been completed. Here are the questions: * What was the government surveillance proposal you responded to? Please describe the nature of the surveillance proposal/ program/ bills, and include any relevant links. * How did you formulate a strategy in response? (ie. litigation, FOIA requests, blogging, video / new media campaign) * How did you garner media attention about your campaign? How did you influence the public messaging around your issue? What “memes” did you use to counteract the government’s framing of the issue? (i.e. when governments justify the need for a program by highlighting child porn, terrorism, or the war on drugs). * How did your efforts affect the outcome of the proposal or surveillance practice? * What are some lessons, tips and/ or advice that you have gained from this experience and would like to share with global activists working on digital rights issues? Your answers to these questions can help EFF to create a valuable resource for digital freedom activists throughout the world. Thank you for devoting time and attention to this project. Sincerely, -- Katitza Rodriguez International Rights Director Electronic Frontier Foundation katitza at eff.org katitza at datos-personales.org (personal email) Please support EFF - Working to protect your digital rights and freedom of speech since 1990 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From gurstein at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 02:20:54 2012 From: gurstein at gmail.com (michael gurstein) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:20:54 +0700 Subject: [governance] Sandy and the internet infrastructure Message-ID: <047101cdb72f$fab7fc40$f027f4c0$@gmail.com> Superstorm Sandy wreaks havoc on internet infrastructure http://t.co/8I34uSWD http://gigaom.com/cloud/superstorm-sandy-wreaks-havoc-on-internet-infrastructure/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From iza at anr.org Wed Oct 31 05:05:59 2012 From: iza at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:05:59 +0900 Subject: [governance] Fwd: IGF 2012 - Bilateral meeting In-Reply-To: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3EC@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> References: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3EC@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: Following the one in Nairobi last year, European commission and European Parliament people want to hold an informal meeting with civil society members and asked Wolfgang to coordinate. Since this is an informal meeting with limited space, we need to find and decide who will be there. Around 5 or 6 people, max. Time/Date/Venue are not confirmed, though. Please indicate if you like to attend. I will consult Sala and Worlgang to make the selection taking account regional, gender and other factors in balance. thanks, izumi -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From b.schombe at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 05:34:49 2012 From: b.schombe at gmail.com (Baudouin SCHOMBE) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 10:34:49 +0100 Subject: [governance] Fwd: IGF 2012 - Bilateral meeting In-Reply-To: References: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3EC@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: I will be SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN Téléphone mobile:+243998983491 email : b.schombe at gmail.com skype : b.schombe blog : http://akimambo.unblog.fr Site Web : www.ticafrica.net 2012/10/31 Izumi AIZU > Following the one in Nairobi last year, European commission and > European Parliament > people want to hold an informal meeting with civil society members and > asked Wolfgang to coordinate. > > Since this is an informal meeting with limited space, we need to find and > decide who will > be there. Around 5 or 6 people, max. > > Time/Date/Venue are not confirmed, though. > > Please indicate if you like to attend. I will consult Sala and Worlgang to > make > the selection taking account regional, gender and other factors in balance. > > thanks, > > izumi > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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: -------------- 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 From aizu at anr.org Wed Oct 31 05:37:13 2012 From: aizu at anr.org (Izumi AIZU) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:37:13 +0900 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> Message-ID: Dear list, Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance and also from developing region. And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? Many thanks, izumi 2012/10/11 William Drake : > it's what they're sending registrants > > On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: > > What? When did this happen? > > On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >> >> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >> privacy protection in Internet governance. >> >> Best >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >> >> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I >> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >> think it is an NGO thing. >> >> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >> >> Best >> >> Nnenna >> >> >> >> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Milton L Mueller >> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >> >> >> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >> >> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >> abilities when we nominate them. >> >> Ginger and colleagues: >> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >> at the moment, so… >> >> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >> development…I defer to others there. >> >> Human rights >> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >> should not involve prior restraint. >> >> Security and Securitization >> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >> for users' security needs. >> >> Multistakeholderism >> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >> >> 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.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 >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > -- >> Izumi Aizu << Institute for InfoSocionomics, Tama University, Tokyo Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita, Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Oct 31 06:27:38 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 15:57:38 +0530 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <5090FD1A.1040809@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 31 October 2012 03:07 PM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. > > Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, > and Nnnena seems to have received good support With due respect to all involved, especially Nnenna.... This is what Nnenna wrote a few days back in an email to this list... "I do not mind "reading a statement" that has been consensually drafted, on behalf of the CS. Please note that my badge will bear "Private Sector" as I registered as the CEO of my Consultancy." I will find it more than a bit odd and embarrassing... parminder > and fulfills the gender balance > and also from developing region. > > And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points > into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. > > May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? > > Many thanks, > > izumi > > > > > > 2012/10/11 William Drake : >> it's what they're sending registrants >> >> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >> >> What? When did this happen? >> >> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>> >>> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I >>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >>> think it is an NGO thing. >>> >>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> >>> >>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Milton L Mueller >>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>> >>> >>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >>> >>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >>> abilities when we nominate them. >>> >>> Ginger and colleagues: >>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >>> at the moment, so… >>> >>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >>> development…I defer to others there. >>> >>> Human rights >>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>> should not involve prior restraint. >>> >>> Security and Securitization >>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >>> for users' security needs. >>> >>> Multistakeholderism >>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >>> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>> >>> 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.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 >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Oct 31 06:32:36 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:32:36 +0100 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <93E72A45-999E-4C94-A22C-D70C2FBFDB47@uzh.ch> Hi On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. > > Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, > and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance > and also from developing region. Am I misremembering or did Nnnena say she is now with the private sector? In any event, I believe the secretariat is already reaching out to people, but it would still be good for IGC to submit something. On another note: is there a plan to hold an IGC meeting per usual? If so, do we have a room, hopefully at a relatively non-conflicting time? Best, Bill -------------- 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 From parminder at itforchange.net Wed Oct 31 06:40:16 2012 From: parminder at itforchange.net (parminder) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:10:16 +0530 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <93E72A45-999E-4C94-A22C-D70C2FBFDB47@uzh.ch> References: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> <93E72A45-999E-4C94-A22C-D70C2FBFDB47@uzh.c h> Message-ID: <50910010.7060308@itforchange.net> On Wednesday 31 October 2012 04:02 PM, William Drake wrote: > Hi > > On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >> >> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, >> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance >> and also from developing region. > Am I misremembering or did Nnnena say she is now with the private sector? Bill, It must be after a long time that we said exactly the same thing, separated by just 5 minutes :) . parminder > In any event, I believe the secretariat is already reaching out to people, but it would still be good for IGC to submit something. > > On another note: is there a plan to hold an IGC meeting per usual? If so, do we have a room, hopefully at a relatively non-conflicting time? > > Best, > > Bill > > > -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Oct 31 06:48:49 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:48:49 +0100 Subject: [governance] WCIT @ Baku Message-ID: Hello Since there's been much discussion of late on the WCIT, I wanted to call the your attention a couple of opportunities to explore the issues in Baku (in addition to the Best Bits meeting). On Day 1 of the IGF, Markus Kummer and I have organized (with the cosponsorship of APC, OII, and IIPL in Beijing) a workshop on, The International Telecommunication Regulations and Internet Governance: Multistakeholder Perspectives http://tinyurl.com/IGF-Baku-ITR-workshop. The event will be held Tuesday 6 November from 16:30-18:00 in Conference Room 5. Speakers will include Richard Beaird (US Department of State), Vint Cerf (Google), Geoff Huston (APNIC), Alice Munyua (Government of Kenya), Franklin Silva Netto (Government of Brazil), and myself, with Markus moderating. On Day 2, I will be co-moderating with Chris Disspain the Main Session on CIRs, Wednesday 7 from 9:30-12:30 in the main session room. Topics covered will include international reactions to "controversial" new gTLDs, IPv4 markets and the transition to IPv6, the ITRs and WCIT, and enhanced cooperation. Speakers will include Fiona Alexander (Government of the United States), Anriette Esterhuysen (APC), Luigi Gambardella (European Telecommunications Network Operators), David Gross (Wiley Rein, and former US Ambassador), Geoff Huston (APNIC), Milton Mueller (Syracuse University) Alice Munyua (Government of Kenya), Franklin Silva Netto (Government of Brazil), and Pedro Veiga (ISOC Portugal & GAC). Best, Bill *************************************************** William J. Drake International Fellow & Lecturer Media Change & Innovation Division, IPMZ University of Zurich, Switzerland william.drake at uzh.ch www.williamdrake.org **************************************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Oct 31 06:51:39 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 11:51:39 +0100 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <50910010.7060308@itforchange.net> References: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> <93E72A45-999E-4C94-A22C-D70C2FBFDB47@uzh.c h> <50910010.7060308@itforchange.net> Message-ID: On Oct 31, 2012, at 11:40 AM, parminder wrote: > Bill, It must be after a long time that we said exactly the same thing, separated by just 5 minutes :) . parminder Scary. Don't worry, we'll have all weekend to fetishize points of difference :-) BD -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn Wed Oct 31 07:26:49 2012 From: tijani.benjemaa at planet.tn (Tijani BEN JEMAA) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:26:49 +0100 Subject: [governance] Fwd: IGF 2012 - Bilateral meeting In-Reply-To: References: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3EC@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: <014a01cdb75a$9ee80d80$dcb82880$@benjemaa@planet.tn> Yes Izumi, I want to attend this meeting. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tijani BEN JEMAA Executive Director Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) Phone: +216 98 330 114 Mobile: +216 41 649 605 Fax: +216 70 825 231 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- De : izumiaizu at gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu at gmail.com] De la part de Izumi AIZU Envoyé : mercredi 31 octobre 2012 10:06 À : governance Objet : [governance] Fwd: IGF 2012 - Bilateral meeting Following the one in Nairobi last year, European commission and European Parliament people want to hold an informal meeting with civil society members and asked Wolfgang to coordinate. Since this is an informal meeting with limited space, we need to find and decide who will be there. Around 5 or 6 people, max. Time/Date/Venue are not confirmed, though. Please indicate if you like to attend. I will consult Sala and Worlgang to make the selection taking account regional, gender and other factors in balance. thanks, izumi _____ Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message. Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr Version: 2013.0.2742 / Base de données virale: 2617/5863 - Date: 30/10/2012 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From capdasiege at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 11:37:14 2012 From: capdasiege at gmail.com (CAPDA CAPDA) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:37:14 +0100 Subject: [governance] Fwd: IGF 2012 - Bilateral meeting In-Reply-To: References: <2DA93620FC07494C926D60C8E3C2F1A8010CD3EC@server1.medienkomm.uni-halle.de> Message-ID: HI, I will like to attend this meeting. Best 2012/10/31 Izumi AIZU > Following the one in Nairobi last year, European commission and > European Parliament > people want to hold an informal meeting with civil society members and > asked Wolfgang to coordinate. > > Since this is an informal meeting with limited space, we need to find and > decide who will > be there. Around 5 or 6 people, max. > > Time/Date/Venue are not confirmed, though. > > Please indicate if you like to attend. I will consult Sala and Worlgang to > make > the selection taking account regional, gender and other factors in balance. > > thanks, > > izumi > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > 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 > > -- *Michel TCHONANG LINZE* Coordinateur Général Coordonnateur Régional Afrique Centrale Réseau Panafricain Société Civile (ACSIS) *ÉVÈNEMENTS SUR LES TIC** ! * - FGI du 06 au 09 novembre 2012 Baku, Azerbaïdjan - Colloque mondial sur la normalisation (GSS-12) le 19 novembre 2012, Dubaï - *AMNT-12* du 20 au 29 novembre 2012 à Dubaï - *AFRINIC-17* du 24 - 29 Novembre 2012 à Khartoum-Soudan - *Africa-EU* Cooperation Forum on ICT du 26-30 Novembre 2012 à Lisbonne - Portugal - *CMTI-12* du 3 au 14 décembre 2012 à Dubaï CAPDA (Consortium d'Appui aux Actions pour la Promotion et le Développement de l'Afrique) BP : 15 151 DOUALA - CAMEROUN Tél. : (237) 7775-39-63 / 2212-9493/ 3340-46-49 Fax : (237) 3340-46-49 Email : capdasiege at gmail.com / forumtic2005 at yahoo.fr Site : www.ict-forum.org ; www.ict-africa.org ; *www.tic-afrique.org* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From olgacavalli at gmail.com Wed Oct 31 13:03:31 2012 From: olgacavalli at gmail.com (Olga Cavalli) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:03:31 -0300 Subject: [governance] Invitation to workshop 69 and 70 in IGF Baku - Aplogies for double posting Message-ID: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Oct 31 15:04:03 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:04:03 +0100 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: References: <506B08C9.90107@cgi.br> <506B2256.1030707@nupef.org.br> <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> Message-ID: <3FB570B8-87ED-4B0D-8D39-0B72370BD6C9@uzh.ch> Hi The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. Bill On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > Dear list, > > Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. > > Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, > and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance > and also from developing region. > > And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points > into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. > > May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? > > Many thanks, > > izumi > > > > > > 2012/10/11 William Drake : >> it's what they're sending registrants >> >> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >> >> What? When did this happen? >> >> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>> >>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Bill >>> >>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>> >>> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I >>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >>> think it is an NGO thing. >>> >>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>> >>> Best >>> >>> Nnenna >>> >>> >>> >>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>> >>> ________________________________ >>> From: Milton L Mueller >>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>> >>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>> >>> >>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >>> >>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >>> abilities when we nominate them. >>> >>> Ginger and colleagues: >>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >>> at the moment, so… >>> >>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >>> development…I defer to others there. >>> >>> Human rights >>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>> should not involve prior restraint. >>> >>> Security and Securitization >>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >>> for users' security needs. >>> >>> Multistakeholderism >>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >>> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>> >>> 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.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 >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- >>> 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.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 -------------- ____________________________________________________________ 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 From glaser at cgi.br Wed Oct 31 15:05:38 2012 From: glaser at cgi.br (Hartmut Richard Glaser) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:05:38 -0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <3FB570B8-87ED-4B0D-8D39-0B72370BD6C9@uzh.ch> References: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> <3FB570B8-87ED-4B0D-8D39-0B72370BD6C9@uzh. ch> Message-ID: <50917682.3030407@cgi.br> *Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... * ========================================== On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: > Hi > > The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. > > Bill > > On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: > >> Dear list, >> >> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >> >> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, >> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance >> and also from developing region. >> >> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points >> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. >> >> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >> >> Many thanks, >> >> izumi >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >>> it's what they're sending registrants >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >>> >>> What? When did this happen? >>> >>> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >>>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Bill >>>> >>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>>> >>>> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I >>>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >>>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >>>> think it is an NGO thing. >>>> >>>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>>> >>>> Best >>>> >>>> Nnenna >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >>>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Milton L Mueller >>>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>>> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>>> >>>> >>>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >>>> >>>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >>>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >>>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >>>> abilities when we nominate them. >>>> >>>> Ginger and colleagues: >>>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >>>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>>> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >>>> at the moment, so… >>>> >>>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >>>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >>>> development…I defer to others there. >>>> >>>> Human rights >>>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >>>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >>>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>>> should not involve prior restraint. >>>> >>>> Security and Securitization >>>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >>>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >>>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >>>> for users' security needs. >>>> >>>> Multistakeholderism >>>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >>>> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >>>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >>>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >>>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >>>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >>>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >>>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>>> >>>> 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.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 >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> ____________________________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> -- >>>> 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.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: -------------- 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 From william.drake at uzh.ch Wed Oct 31 15:09:55 2012 From: william.drake at uzh.ch (William Drake) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 20:09:55 +0100 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <50917682.3030407@cgi.br> References: <0CB09DB8-E475-4EEB-B1DB-84F1F921071E@privaterra.org> <506BCAF1.7080504@itforchange.net> <506BCC3A.3080703@itforchange.net> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD2248050@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD224C0EE@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu> <1349860254.22164.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <2A131ED0-0371-4EDA-AE99-98943AD1D33C@uzh.ch> <04985B25-E155-4931-A380-FC92F0D50033@uzh.ch> <3FB570B8-87ED-4B0D-8D39-0B72370BD6C9@uzh. ch> <50917682.3030407@cgi.br> Message-ID: <3ABF331D-9A56-4585-8F8F-AC3842765650@uzh.ch> My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: > > Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... > > ========================================== > On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: >> Hi >> >> The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. >> >> Bill >> >> On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >> >>> Dear list, >>> >>> Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. >>> >>> Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, >>> and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance >>> and also from developing region. >>> >>> And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points >>> into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. >>> >>> May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> >>> izumi >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 2012/10/11 William Drake : >>>> it's what they're sending registrants >>>> >>>> On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: >>>> >>>> What? When did this happen? >>>> >>>> On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>>>> In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly >>>>> disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have >>>>> speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal >>>>> privacy protection in Internet governance. >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> >>>>> Bill >>>>> >>>>> On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire >>>>> Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I >>>>> would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active >>>>> national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some >>>>> countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear >>>>> overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or >>>>> think it is an NGO thing. >>>>> >>>>> Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that >>>>> "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own >>>>> >>>>> Best >>>>> >>>>> Nnenna >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants >>>>> Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development >>>>> Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 >>>>> Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org >>>>> nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: Milton L Mueller >>>>> To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" >>>>> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM >>>>> Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque >>>>> >>>>> I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not >>>>> 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as >>>>> their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking >>>>> abilities when we nominate them. >>>>> >>>>> Ginger and colleagues: >>>>> Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there >>>>> been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more >>>>> important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is >>>>> the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" >>>>> at the moment, so… >>>>> >>>>> let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately >>>>> believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address >>>>> them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope >>>>> others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, >>>>> development…I defer to others there. >>>>> >>>>> Human rights >>>>> CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global >>>>> communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of >>>>> the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of >>>>> information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to >>>>> freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national >>>>> Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny >>>>> individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. >>>>> All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal >>>>> and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and >>>>> should not involve prior restraint. >>>>> >>>>> Security and Securitization >>>>> CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would >>>>> foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or >>>>> private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware >>>>> for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are >>>>> deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are >>>>> skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and >>>>> communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that >>>>> Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and >>>>> that national security and military agendas often work against rather than >>>>> for users' security needs. >>>>> >>>>> Multistakeholderism >>>>> Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS >>>>> welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that >>>>> multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder >>>>> participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance >>>>> institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not >>>>> by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the >>>>> best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces >>>>> created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and >>>>> corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. >>>>> MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, >>>>> separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. >>>>> >>>>> 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.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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>> >>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>>>> 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.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: -------------- 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 From ca at cafonso.ca Wed Oct 31 16:32:36 2012 From: ca at cafonso.ca (Carlos A. Afonso) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:32:36 -0200 Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku Message-ID: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> :) Carlos A. AfonsoWilliam Drake escreveu:My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... ========================================== On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: Hi The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. Bill On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: Dear list, Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance and also from developing region. And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? Many thanks, izumi 2012/10/11 William Drake : it's what they're sending registrants On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: What? When did this happen? On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal privacy protection in Internet governance. Best Bill On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or think it is an NGO thing. Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own Best Nnenna Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Milton L Mueller To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. Ginger and colleagues: Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so… let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development…I defer to others there. Human rights CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint. Security and Securitization CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs. Multistakeholderism Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. 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.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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 -- 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.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: -------------- 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 From nne75 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 31 16:58:51 2012 From: nne75 at yahoo.com (Nnenna) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:58:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku In-Reply-To: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> References: <6htvq562u9xwndojpff6tjwa.1351715549740@email.android.com> Message-ID: <1351717131.30525.YahooMailNeo@web120102.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> I think Carlos and Valentina make a great pair. Cheers N   Nnenna  Nwakanma |  Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG  |  Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax  224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Carlos A. Afonso To: william.drake at uzh.ch; glaser at cgi.br Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 8:32 PM Subject: Re: Re: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku :) Carlos A. Afonso William Drake escreveu: My apologies to Carlos, I cut and paste from someone else's email On Oct 31, 2012, at 8:05 PM, Hartmut Richard Glaser wrote: >Correct name is => Carlos Alberto Afonso ... > >========================================== > >On 31/10/12 17:04, William Drake wrote: > >Hi The secretariat has invited Carlos Alfonso for the opening session and Valentina Pellizzer for the closing session. Bill On Oct 31, 2012, at 10:37 AM, Izumi AIZU wrote: >>Dear list, Sorry for not following this up earlier. Just too many things to do. Though I said we may run a poll, I guess Carlos is already our de facto speaker, and Nnnena seems to have received good support and fulfills the gender balance and also from developing region. And as Ginger rightly suggested both speakers will take up the talking points into their text, with some degree of, of course, their own words to be added. May I ask you if this is our rough consensus? Many thanks, izumi 2012/10/11 William Drake : >>>it's what they're sending registrants On Oct 11, 2012, at 8:42 AM, Katy P wrote: What? When did this happen? On Oct 11, 2012 8:24 AM, "William Drake" wrote: >>>>In light of the host country's jaw dropping decision to publicly disseminate all participants' passport numbers, I hope whoever we have speaking in the opening an closing will emphasize the centrality of personal privacy protection in Internet governance. Best Bill On Oct 10, 2012, at 5:10 AM, Nnenna wrote: +1 On each of the points below. I am currently in the Côte d'Ivoire Internet Governance Forum and my drafting capacity is limited. However, I would like to see a line that extends "Multistakeholderism" down to active national participation of all stakeholders. AFAIK, in as much as in some countries, the government is weighing in, in ways that may appear overbearing, in others, the decision-makers are actually note interested or think it is an NGO thing. Can we have a "Development Agenda" paragraph? I am also thinking that "Participation" may also need to be a paragraph of its own Best Nnenna Nnenna Nwakanma | Founder and CEO, NNENNA.ORG | Consultants Information | Communications | Technology and Events | for Development Cote d'Ivoire (+225)| Tel: 225 27144 | Fax 224 26471 |Mob. 07416820 Ghana: +233 249561345| Nigeria: +234 8101887065| http://www.nnenna.org/ nnenna at nnenna.org| @nnenna | Skype - nnenna75 | nnennaorg.blogspot.com ________________________________ From: Milton L Mueller To: 'Ginger Paque' ; "governance at lists.igcaucus.org" Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2012 9:07 PM Subject: RE: [governance] CS Speakers for Baku From: gpaque at gmail.com [mailto:gpaque at gmail.com] On Behalf Of Ginger Paque I think that both points are important... I would say 'in addition to' not 'rather than'. Whom we choose sends a signal as sometimes as significant as their words, and we tend to know their general positions as well as speaking abilities when we nominate them. Ginger and colleagues: Yes, of course it is "in addition to" not "rather than" - but has there been any substantive discussion yet? Frankly I think what they say is more important than who we choose, but agree that in some cases "the medium is the message." At any rate we are long on "who" and rather short on "what" at the moment, so… let me throw out three short statements on issues that I passionately believe should be addressed. In doing so, I will make an attempt to address them in a way that takes into account the differences among us and hope others do so in the same spirit. Other candidate topics would include IPR, development…I defer to others there. Human rights CS believes that the absence of gatekeepers and the open, global communication enabled by the Internet realizes the promise of Article 19 of the UN UDHR. To erect (national) legal barriers to the free flow of information is a bad idea and contrary to the individual human right to freedom of expression. We therefore oppose efforts to create "national Internets," or to block and filter internet access in ways that deny individuals access to applications, content and services of their choice. All attempts to deem certain forms of communication and information illegal and remove them must follow established, transparent processes of law and should not involve prior restraint. Security and Securitization CS opposes efforts to militarize the Internet, or any actions that would foster a destructive and wasteful cyber arms race among governments and/or private actors. We consider the surreptitious use of exploits and malware for surveillance or attacks to be criminal regardless of whether they are deployed by governments, private corporations or organized criminals. We are skeptical of efforts to subordinate the design and use of information and communication technology to "national security" agendas. We believe that Internet security will be achieved primarily at the operational level and that national security and military agendas often work against rather than for users' security needs. Multistakeholderism Global governance institutions should not be restricted to states, so CS welcomes the additional participation in global policy making that multi-stakeholder processes provide. But CS cautions that multi-stakeholder participation is not an end in itself. Opening up global governance institutions to additional voices from civil society and business does not by itself ensure that individual rights are adequately protected or that the best substantive policies are developed and enforced. In the informal spaces created by MS institutions, it is possible that powerful governmental and corporate actors can make deals contrary to the interests of Internet users. MS processes must incorporate and institutionalize concepts of due process, separation of powers and user's inalienable civil and political rights. 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.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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 ____________________________________________________________ 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 >>>>____________________________________________________________ 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 >>>-- >>>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.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 > ____________________________________________________________ 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: -------------- 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 From camino_manjon_83 at hotmail.com Thu Oct 18 10:51:08 2012 From: camino_manjon_83 at hotmail.com (Camino Manjon Sierra) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:51:08 +0000 Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi there, I have not received that email but I can confirm Murad has dealt with the visas of the EC officials. So I understand there is nothing to fear :) The source is good. Best regards Camino Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:46:38 +0300 From: skiden at gmail.com To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org Subject: [governance] IGF 2012 Greetings, I hope this email finds you all doing okay. I received an email (see below) about providing itinerary and accommodation details for IGF 2012. Has anyone else received an email like this? Kind regards, Sarah ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: participant at igf2012.az Date: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 5:19 PM Subject: Новое сообщение To: skiden Dear Sir/Madam,Herewith the IGF host country Secretariat kindly asks you to provide yourfull itinerary and accommodation information to us.Looking forward to welcoming you in Baku.Best Regards,Murad Maksudov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- 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