[governance] Re: OBJECTION ACK Re: DMP} Re: [Final draft for final comments] Letter to Pres. Rousseff
Avri Doria
avri at acm.org
Thu Sep 26 09:34:01 EDT 2013
Hi,
I appreciate that this is your current position, but it was not several months ago. I do not have time to go through and find all the mail from Brazil that condemned the process.
That is why I supported the letter without supporting the process. It is only the last edit that pushed me over the edge to recommending against signing.
I agree with Anja that more support of Multistakeholder governance would be helpful, but at least there had been a touch in the precious letter until it was overshadowed by the last edit.
avri
On 26 Sep 2013, at 09:19, Carlos A. Afonso wrote:
> Dear Avri, the MC has not been "hijacked by the government". It remains
> so far the same proposal civil society here endorsed when it was finally
> introduced to Congress after two years of public discussion. Like in any
> representative democracy, the process through Congress will be painful,
> and I think the letter tries to make clear that we are defending the MC
> version which retains the values expressed in the letter. We might lose
> the battle, but there is no hijacking, and the tide seems to be turning
> in our favor.
>
> I cannot tell you how hard was our effort to get through the usual
> barriers to reach the president. And the result was in our view
> formidable -- we cannot lose momentum now. The MC is now going through a
> fast-track process and must be approved in less than three months -- we
> must make sure that what is approved is as close as possible to the
> original proposal.
>
> So, this support is very relevant to strengthen our advocacy here at
> this moment.
>
> fraternal regards
>
> --c.a.
>
> On 09/26/2013 10:04 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am sorry.
>>
>> I was satisfied with the previous version and was happy we had something supportable until the last minute changes
>>
>> But after hearing for months, on this list and elsewhere, about how the Marco Civil had been hijacked by the government and altered, even if it started as a multistakeholder process, I do not beleive we should endorse that process.
>>
>> So while I favored the supporting language, I do not accept anything that can show that Civil society is fine with Government driven processes that can be hijacked by the government.
>>
>>
>> avri
>>
>> On 26 Sep 2013, at 08:47, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>
>>> [With IGC coordinator hat on]
>>>
>>> Since Avri is objecting, we now don't have consensus.
>>>
>>> Since we don't have time for a rough consensus call (which according to
>>> the charter requires at least 48 hours) this means that unless Avri
>>> withdraws her objection, IGC won't endorse the letter.
>>>
>>> Greetings,
>>> Norbert
>>>
>>>
>>> Am Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:37:53 -0400
>>> schrieb Carolina <carolina.rossini at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> Hi Avri,
>>>> I think your conclusion about what we (Brazilians) say/think is not
>>>> totally correct. The issue around Marco Civil is much more complex.
>>>> It does have really good text and principles. There are some
>>>> contentious issues, including ISP liability, NN and data retention
>>>> and mirroring, but still is a exemplary bill and process. I would be
>>>> happy to chat with you by Skype and go over all such issues and map
>>>> how the actors are around these are in Brazil. Best, Carolina
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 26, 2013, at 8:30 AM, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Re[sectifully disagree.
>>>>>
>>>>> We went through months of messages in various list of how the
>>>>> process for the Marco Civil had left the Civil Society and the CGI
>>>>> behind. Until this letter, everything I was hearing from
>>>>> Brazilians was how bad Marco Civil was. Now we have a situation
>>>>> where several countries have joined the list of countries gone
>>>>> rouge and civil society is willing to go back to government run
>>>>> models.
>>>>>
>>>>> I disagree with the letter as currently changed, though I had
>>>>> supported it before the change.
>>>>>
>>>>> avri
>>>>>
>>>>> On 26 Sep 2013, at 08:20, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> [with IGC coordinator hat on]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If I'm reading this right, this discussion seems to have arrived at
>>>>>> what may be a consensus text. Congratulations!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to request that as soon as the draft text is believed to
>>>>>> have stabilized, one of the drafters post a complete copy of the
>>>>>> text, as the basis for a formal IGC consensus call.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Greetings,
>>>>>> Norbert
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> parminder at itforchange.net wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for an excellent and quick, Joana.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Parminder, we reached our deadline of 9am in BRA. Lets proceed
>>>>>>>> with the endorsements, ok?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Marco civil is on item 2. We could add something like this
>>>>>>>> yellow part about the process:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Stress the importance of the timely adoption of the Brazilian
>>>>>>>> Draft Bill
>>>>>>>> of Internet Rights (Marco Civil da Internet) in a way that
>>>>>>>> upholds these principles and endorses the innovative and
>>>>>>>> democratic process in which it was conceived.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:35 PM, parminder
>>>>>>>> <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Joana
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am fine if I am explained why marco process cannot be
>>>>>>>>> mentioned as bring
>>>>>>>>> a part of Brazilian IG scene that should be promoted... I
>>>>>>>>> understand that
>>>>>>>>> this process is also deliberative while being consensus seeking.
>>>>>>>>> Marco Civil process is a big and a happy part of the Brazilian
>>>>>>>>> IG scene, why should bwe not mention it.
>>>>>>>>> parminder
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thursday 26 September 2013 04:57 PM, Joana Varon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dear Parminder,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Considering the support from the others, this is as far as we
>>>>>>>>> could go:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 4. Reinforce our support for the Brazilian multistakeholder
>>>>>>>>> model for Internet governance lead by CGI.br.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Im happy you see CGI model as the whole model to be extended to
>>>>>>>>> the world.
>>>>>>>>> And we can chat a lot about it. Indeed, its a very good starting
>>>>>>>>> point. But
>>>>>>>>> it still have its problems, as every innovative way of deal with
>>>>>>>>> things. In
>>>>>>>>> fact, this letter has also the goal to straighten CGI political
>>>>>>>>> power as endorsing it as a legitim intent. So, for the purpose
>>>>>>>>> if this and for wider consensus lets stay at this point, ok?
>>>>>>>>> The part of marco civil is already mentioned in previous
>>>>>>>>> paragraphs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We shall publish it now at BB for collecting signatures as time
>>>>>>>>> is passing
>>>>>>>>> by. Will come up with a link asap. Hope u could help with the
>>>>>>>>> outreach.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks once again for all the inputs, collaboration and
>>>>>>>>> insights.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Joana
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 26, 2013 1:00 PM, "Suresh Ramasubramanian"
>>>>>>>>> <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The text is fine as it is.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Do any other members of the caucus feel strongly about changing
>>>>>>>>>> point 4?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --srs (htc one x)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 26 September 2013 4:00:48 PM Joana Varon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ops, just saw Parminder's emails with direct suggestions. So
>>>>>>>>>> could we go
>>>>>>>>>> for:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 4. Reinforce our support for the Brazilian multistakeholder
>>>>>>>>>> model for Internet governance lead by CGI.br.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Joana Varon
>>>>>>>>>> <joana at varonferraz.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Louis and Parminder,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Until now you were the only ones that didnt agree fully with
>>>>>>>>>>> the texto,
>>>>>>>>>>> due to paragraph 4. From what I've got:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - Parminder has a stronger take that THE Brazilian model
>>>>>>>>>>> should be extended to the world.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - Louis said that we should remove that mention on the text.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Before we start drafting the text, the issue about of
>>>>>>>>>>> multilateral vs multistakeholderism was raised and we came to
>>>>>>>>>>> a conclusion that though its
>>>>>>>>>>> not the time to criticize this specific point of Dilma's
>>>>>>>>>>> speech, we should
>>>>>>>>>>> reinforce our support for developing models for a
>>>>>>>>>>> multistakeholder approach
>>>>>>>>>>> on IG, also having CGI experiences as a inspiration.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Having in mind that for a broader endorsement we need to reach
>>>>>>>>>>> this middle ground, would you be fine with the actual version
>>>>>>>>>>> or want to submit
>>>>>>>>>>> changes in the language that don't affect this (middle ground)
>>>>>>>>>>> meaning?
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks a lot for the understanding.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> best
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> joana
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:04 PM, Louis Pouzin (well)
>>>>>>>>>>> <pouzin at well.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO it would be better without parag 4.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, Louis
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> btw, for those not living there, local brazilian time is
>>>>>>>>>>>> UTC-3
>>>>>>>>>>>> - - -
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 26 September 2013 7:14:17 AM Joana Varon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Please, find a reduced version below. We are closing the pad
>>>>>>>>>>>>> now to avoid more crazy joined editing processes. Thanks for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> all the contributions.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Let's receive final comments about very punctual changes or
>>>>>>>>>>>>> major disagreements and gaps until tomorrow (Thursday) 9:00
>>>>>>>>>>>>> am (Brazilian time).
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then collect endorsements through out the day.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Deadline for signatures will be this Thursday night, let's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> say 22:00, also Brazilian time*. So Carlos can deliver it
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in hand to President Dilma. *
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> thanks once again,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> joana
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Letter from** International C**ivil Society**
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Organizations** **to President Dilma Rousseff in support of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> her **statement at **the 68th Session of the **UNGA *
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your Excellency,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We, the undersigned organizations and individuals from
>>>>>>>>>>>>> around the world, committed to the development of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet and its use for advancing social and economic
>>>>>>>>>>>>> justice, would like to express our strong support for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> statement delivered this week by your Excellency
>>>>>>>>>>>>> at the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We commend you for taking a leading role on these issues and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> would like to:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. Fully endorse the five principles enunciated on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> occasion, in clear accordance with the Brazilian Internet
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Steering Committee*'*s* *Principles
>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the Governance and Use of the Internet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Stress the importance of the timely adoption of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brazilian Draft Bill of Internet Rights (Marco Civil da
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet) in a way that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> upholds these principles.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Commend the courage of Brazil in expressing disapproval
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and demanding explanations from the USA about the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> procedures of illegal interception of information and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> data, framing it as a grave violation of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> human rights and of civil liberties
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4.* *Reinforce our support for an extension into broader
>>>>>>>>>>>>> spheres of Internet Governance of the experiences from the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brazilian multistakeholder model of Internet governance, led
>>>>>>>>>>>>> by CGI.br, which comprises representatives from Government,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Scientific and TechnologyCommunity,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> private sector and Civil Society on an equal footing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> We express our deep appreciation for your serious commitment
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to social justice and development, of which an open, stable,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and reliable
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Internet is a fundamental pillar.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Signatories:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>>>>>>>>>> @joana_varon
>>>>>>>>>>> PGP 0x016B8E73
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>>>>>>>>> @joana_varon
>>>>>>>>>> PGP 0x016B8E73
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>>>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>>>>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>>>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>>>>>>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>>>>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joana Varon Ferraz
>>>>>>>> @joana_varon
>>>>>>>> PGP 0x016B8E73
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>>>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>>>> governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>>>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>>>>>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>>>>>> http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>>>> To 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
More information about the Governance
mailing list