[governance] U.S. - Japan Policy Cooperation Dialogue on the Internet Economy

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

That says quite a lot without saying anything very much I am afraid.

--srs (htc one x)


----- Reply message -----
From: "parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net>
To: <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
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 <parminder at itforchange.net 
> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>> 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 This article, while certainly out of date given the recent detente 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: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121025/bc0fc803/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t